County  Option 

In  Indiana 


By 

HON.  J.  FRANK  HANLY 

Ex-Governor  of  Indiana 


Published  By 

THE  AMERICAN  ISSUE  PUBLISHING  COMPANY 

WRSTERVILLE,  OHIO 

19  10 


^i^^ 


County  Option  in  Indiana 

i 

By  HON.  J.  FRANK  HANLY 

Ex-Governor  of  Indiana 

Fellow   Citizens: 

It  is  not  only  the  privilege,  it  is  the  right  and  the  bounden  duty  of  every 
man  living  in  a  free  commonwealth  to  speak  the  truth  to  his  fellows,  without  fear 
or  favor,  as  God  gives  him  to  see  and  understand  the  truth,  concerning  any  matter 
affecting  the  public  welfare.  One's  countrymen  are  entitled  to  the  reason  for 
the  faith  by  which  he  walks.  They  may  not  accept  his  faith,  but  his  reasons  for 
his  faith  are  their  just  due. 

This  is  peculiarly  true  of  one  who  has  held  at  the  hands  of  his  fellows  high 
place  in  the  conduct  of  the  commonwealth's  affairs. 

I  am  here  today  to  embrace  that  privilege,  to  claim  that  right  and  discharge  that 
duty  concerning  a  matter  which  I  have  long  felt  and  do  now  feel  to  be  of  deep 
and  abiding  importance  to  this  people — a  people,  who,  in  the  light  of  my  many 
limitations  and  temperamental  defects,  have  signally  honored  me,  making  me 
thereby  their  debtor  to  the  end  of  my  days,  be  they  few  or  many. 

For  months  I  have  not  spoken  on  any  public  question.  But  the  time  has 
come  when  conditions  in  the  state  and  gratitude  for  past  favors  compel  me  to 
break  my  silence.  1  speak  disinterestedly.  If  I  know  my  soul  I  have  no  wish 
but  the  public  good,  no  desire  but  the  happiness  of  this  people.  The  fires  of  self- 
interest  burn  low  on  the  hearthstone  of  my  heart.  My  country  has  become  my 
larger  self,  the  dearest  part  of  me.  I  have  no  machine  or  organization  to  pro- 
mote; no  patronage  to  bestow;  no  favorites  to  reward;  no  foes  to  punish.  I  seek 
no  office;  no  public  preferment  of  any  kind.  There  is  absolutely  nothing  within 
your  power  to  give  or  bestow  that  I  desire  you  to  do  for  me  other  than  to  bear 
me  for  my  cause,  to  give  consideration  to  what  I  say  relating  to  matters  of  public 
concern,  and  to  permit  me  to  continue  to  abide  among  you  and  share  your  destiny, 
whatever  that  destiny  may  be,  until  my  life's  measure  shall  be  filled. 

I  am  conscious  that  it  will  be  difficult  for  some  men  to  accept  this  statement. 
Themselves  accustomed  to  act  only  upon  motives  of  personal  interest,  they  are 
slow  to  believe  that  another  may  act  without  regard  to  such  interests.  And  yet 
the  statement  is  absolutely  true  and  has  beeo  true  every  hour  for  more  than  five 
years. 

There  came  a  moment  early  in  my  administration  of  the  state  government 
when  I  was  compelled  to  choose  between  public  obligation  and  personal  ambi- 
tion; between  duty  and  popularity;  between  service  and  subserviency;  between 
exposure  of  wrong  and  condonation  of  crime.    Face  to  face  with  these  alternatives 


27230.3 


4  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA      ^ 

and  with  .conditions  from  which  I  could  not  turn  aside,  I  made  my  choice.  1 
chose  public  obligation,  duty,  service  and  exposure  of  wrong,  rather  than  personal 
ambition,  popularity,  subserviency  and  condonation  of  crime.  I  knew  then  the 
choice  I  was  making  would  close  the  doors  of  further  public  preferment  against 
me.  That  henceforth  I  would  not  be  permitted  to  pass  through  the  gates.  I 
knew  the  work  I  was  about  to  undertake  would  alienate  many  men  and  arouse 
the  antagonism  of  powerful  and  unscrupulous  special  interests;  that  the  service  I 
was  about  to  perform  would  in  all  human  probability  take  me  out  of  official  life 
forever.  Not  that  you  would  be  ungrateful,  or  that  you  would  not  ultimately 
understand,  but  that  passions  would  be  aroused  and  special  interests  offended — 
passions  that  would  be  long  in  dying,  special  interests  that  would  not  rest  or 
sleep.  I  made  the  choice  with  full  knowledge  of  the  cost.  Satisfied  with  the 
choice  then,  I  am  happy  in  it  now.  The  results  obtained  for  you  and  foV  this 
goodly  commonwealth  have  been  and  still  are  worth  the  cost. 

For  having  made  the  choice  I  then  made,  I  claim  neither  distinction  nor 
special  credit.  A  man  in  my  position  could  not  have  chosen  otherwise.  I 
mention  it  now  only  that  you  may  have  the  true  standpoint  from  which  to  view 
and  weigh  what  I  now  submit;  and  because  the  people  ©f  the  state  are  still  con- 
cerned with  the  chief  result  of  the  choice  I  made  then. 

The  making  of  the  choice  really  began  with  the  hour  of  my  induction  into 
the  executire  office.  In  my  inaugural  address,  after  pointing  out  the  defects  of 
and  the  burdens  imposed  by  the  Nicholson  Law,  the  statute  then  in  force,  I 
recommended  to  the  general  assembly  its  amendment  in  these  words: 

"This  condition  is  intolerable,  and  ought  not  to  continue  beyond  the  day 
of  your  adjournment  and  the  publication  of  your  enactments.  It  destroys  the 
peace  and  disturbs  the  order  and  tranquility  of  society,  creates  constant  and  un- 
ceasing turmoil  among  the  people,  subjects  them  to  frequent  trials  and  constant 
expense,  and  finally  ends  in  the  defeat  of  their  often  and  solemnly  expressed  will. 

"The  statute  should  be  so  amended  that  the  remonstrance  provided  for  shall 
be  against  the  granting  of  license  to  any  and  all  applicants,  and  where  successful, 
that  it  shall  be  unlawful  thereafter  for  the  board  of  commissioners  to  grant  a 
license  to  any  applicant  therefor  during  a  period  of  two  years  from  the  filing  of 
said  remonstrance.  Such  a  remonstrance  will  strike  directly  at  the  traffic,  and 
not  at  the  individual.  If  successful,  it  will  exclude  the  business  from  a  township 
or  ward  for  a  period  of  two  years,  and  give  peace,  order  and  repose  to  the  com- 
munity. 

i^t  *  *  *  * 

"Public  sentiment  relative  to  such  legislation  never  was  as  strong  nor  as 
purposeful  as  it  is  today,  and  I  would,  if  I  could,  direct  that  sentiment  along 
safe  and  practical  lines.  I  therefore  appeal  to  you,  and  to  the  great  body  of  the 
people  of  Indiana,  without  regard  to  party  affiliations,  to  join  in  the  amendment 
suggested.  The  question  is  not  a  party  question.  It  is  above  and  beyond  all 
parties  and  is  as  broad  as  our  common  citizenship,  as  deep  as  our  free  institu- 
tions, and  as  abiding  as  righteousness  itself.** 

When  that  was  written  the  saloon  and  the  brewery  had  long  been  a  domi- 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


nant  force  in  Indiana  politics.  They  had  frequently  controlled  party  conventions 
and  dictated  party  platforms  and  had  more  than  once  given  orders  to  general 
assemblies,  as  to  what  legislation  should  or  should  not  be  enacted,  "No 
sumptuary  legislation"  ran  through  party  platforms  and  echoed  throughout 
legislative  halls.  Reforms  had  been  effected  and  advances  had  been  made  from 
time  to  time  in  the  matter  of  the  regulation  of  the  traffic,  but  the  advances  were 
timid  and  halting,  and  the  reforms  for  the  most  part  ineffective. 

No  citizen  of  the  state  could  voice  in  any  legal  way  his  opposition  to  the 
saloon.  The  recommendation  then  made  was  the  beginning  of  the  movement  foi 
your  enfranchisement  on  that  question.  The  measure  met  with  the  most  i:\ 
iistent  and  unscrupulous  opposition,  but  it  voiced  the  conscience  of  the  enlight 
ened  Christian  manhood  and  womanhood  of  the  state.  An  aroused  public 
opinion  made  way  for  it.  Before  the  session  ended  it  was  crystalized  into  law, 
and  for  the  first  time  in  the  life  of  this  generation,  you  were  given  a  voice  on  this 
question.  The  franchise  then  conferred  upon  you  was  limited  in  its  scope  and 
cumbersome  to  exercise.  We  were  told  that  you  did  not  desire  it;  that  yon 
would  not  use  it  if  conferred  upon  you;  that  you  would  order  its  repeal  at  the 
next  session  of  the  general  assembly.  Our  friend,  Albert  Lieber,  promised  to  fill 
both  chambers  of  the  legislature  with  an  adverse  majority  at  the  next  election. 

But  they  mistook  your  thought,  misapprehended  your  desire,  misinterpreted 
your  purpose  and  underestimated  its  strength. 


Here  is  the  state  as  it  was 
when  you  began  the  campaign 
under  the  remonstrance  law: 


And  here  is  the  state  at  the 
end  of  your  campaign  under 
the  franchise  then  given  van: 


6  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA* 

In  little  over  two  years  you  had  so  used  the  limited  franchise  the  remon- 
strance law  gave  you,  that  you  had  eliminated  the  traffic  from  many  city  wards 
and  more  than  800  townships  and  had  closed  1,687  saloons. 

The  difference  between  these  two  maps  indicates  the  extent  to  which  you 
made  use  of  the  limited  franchise  then  conferred. 

Defeated  in  the  succeeding  election  in  obtaining  an  adverse  majority  in 
the  general  assembly  for  the  law's  repeal,  the  liquor  interests  of  the  state  sought 
its  nullification  and  your  disfranchisement  at  the  hands  of  the  supreme  court  of 
the  state  on  the  ground  of  its  unconstitutionality,  but  the  validity  of  the  law  was 
sustained  and  the  principle  of  local  option  given  judicial  sanction  and  adjudicated 
status. 

Reformation  was  now  making  real  progress.  The  first  step  had  been  taken. 
It  had  been  approved  by  the  people  and  sustained  by  the  supreme  court.  A  pre- 
cedent had  been  established. 

But  under  the  remonstrance  law  the  will  of  the  majority  could  not  always  be 
made  effective.  Good  as  far  as  it  went,  it  stopped  short  of  your  complete  en- 
franchisement. Under  it  the  lack  of  a  majority  of  one  on  the  remonstrance  in  a 
single  township  or  ward,  was  sufficient  to  set  aside  the  will  of  the  people  of  a 
whole  county.  Under  it  in  many  instances  the  minority  became  the  master  and 
usurped  the  authority  of  the  majority,  planting  saloons  in  country  township  and 
in  city  ward  against  the  wish  of  the  great  body  of  the  people  of  both  county  and 
city.  In  such  instances  a  county  or  a  city  could  not  be  made  "dry"  no  matter  what 
the  state  of  public  opinion  or  how  great  the  majority  against  the  traffic.  A 
striking  illustration  of  the  ineffectiveness  of  the  remonstrance  law  was  furnished 
by  the  county  of  Putnam,  and  the  city  of  Greencastle.  Both  the  county  and  the 
city  as  a  whole  were  "dry"  by  an  overwhelming  majority.  But  in  a  single  ward 
of  the  city  having  a  total  electorate  of  less  than  200,  a  majority  could  not  be 
obtained  on  a  remonstrance,  and  saloons  were  opened  and  maintained  in  that 
ward  within  the  very  shadow  of  Depauw  University,  with  its  student  body  of  a 
thousand  young  men  and  women,  making  both  the  city  and  the  county  "wet," 
and  foisting  upon  a  majority  of  the  people  of  both  city  and  county  against  their 
expressed  desire  and  will,  the  shame  and  burden  of  the  open  saloon. 

To  meet  these  defects  in  the  remonstrance  law,  additional  legislation  was 
needed — county  option  by  ballot.  And  so  the  fight  for  the  county  option  law  and 
for  your  complete  enfranchisement  was  begun.  I  was  in  that  fight.  I  was  in  it 
as  a  citizen  in  the  convention  of  my  party.  In  it  officially  as  the  governor  of  the 
state.  And  in  it  later  on  as  counsel  for  the  people  before  the  supreme  court. 
Indeed,  there  are  those  who  say  the  law  then  obtained  is  my  child.  In  a  sense 
it  is,  but  in  a  larger,  truer  sense  it  is  not.  It  was  born  of  the  Christian  conscience 
of  the  people  of  this  splendid  commonwealth  and  of  the  great  conviction  of  a  great 
contention  and  of  a  great  party,  and  of  the  desire  and  efforts  of  a  multitude  of 
men  in  all  parties.  It  is  the  people's  child.  They  have  adopted  it.  It  needs  no 
other  father.  They  adopted  it  with  the  full  knowledge  of  how  and  where  it  was 
conceived,  after  full  consideration  and  by  the  solemn  ceremony  of  formal  elec- 
tions held  in  eighty-two  counties  of  the  state,  by  a  majority  of  more  than  73.000. 


COUNTY  OPTION   IN  INDIANA 


1 


It  is  the  child  of  need  and  of  opportunity.     It  is  the  issue  of  their  union. 

This  second  measure  met  with  more  insistent  and  unscrupulous  opposition 
than  the  first,  but  it  so  voiced  the  conscience  of  the  enlightened  Christian  man- 
hood and  womanhood  of  the  state,  that  an  aroused  public  opinion  made  way  for 
it  as  it  had  made  way  for  its  predecessor. 

It  was  no  sooner  passed,  however,  than  the  liquor  interests  sought  its  repeal 
under  the  whip  and  spur  of  the  state  organization  of  a  great  party,  with  sinews 
of  war  collected  from  and  furnished  by  the  saloonkeepers  and  the  brewers,  but  in 
this  they  failed  again.  Thwarted  in  every  effort  at  repeal,  they  again  sought  the 
law's  nullification  and  your  disfranchisement  in  the  supreme  court.  Here  they 
failed  again,  but  at  the  hands  of  a  divided  court,  three  of  the  judges  sustaining 
the  law,  two  declaring  it  invalid. 

Again  we  were  told  that  you  did  not  desire  the  larger  franchise  we  sought 
to  confer  upon  you.  That  you  would  not  use  it  if  it  were  given  you.  But  again 
they  mistook  your  thought,  misapprehended  your  desire,  mininterpreted  your 
purpose  and  underestimated  its  strength. 

Without  action  on  your  part  the  law  would  have  accomplished  nothing. 
Untouched  by  you  it  would  have  lain  inert,  a  weapon  unwielded.  Use  could  be 
made  of  it  only  when  initiated  by  you.     You  were  under  no  obligation  to  use  it. 

r^^jg — 1^^  ■*  ■  "I      But  again  you  showed  your  approval  of  what 

M  g  iJI  had  been  done  and  your  value  of  the  franchise 

'T^  given  you  by  the  use  you  made  of  the  law. 

■■ —  -*  In    eighteen    months   yo«   held   eighty-two 

count}'-  elections,  in  which  almost  a  half  mil- 
lion votes  were  cast,  and  in  which  the  law 
was  approved  by  a  net  majority  of  more  than 
73.000,  and  in  which  sixty-nine  counties  were 
made  "dry"  and  989  saloons  closed.  Here  i> 
the  state  at  the  close  of  that  campaign: 

The  campaign  was  exciting  and  dramatic 
and  of  immeasurable  educative  value.  You 
pressed  the  foe  at  every  point  and  lost  in  but 
few  instances,  and  in  some  of  these  by  a  ma- 
jority so  small  as  to  assure  your  success  next 
year  if  the  law  is  not  repealed  by  legislative 
act.  or  nullified  by  court  decision. 
/  yH  .^T  T^^^    second   great    step    has     been     taken. 

^^^  B^  i^      /  Another  precedent  has  been  established.     We 

JIBHlc    .i^\^/  ^sr'  have    had    the    law    in    actual    operation    less 

V^'      >/  than  two  rears.    The  saloons  eliminated  under 

it  have  been  all  closed  only  a  single  year.     But  we  can  already  begin  to  make 
intelligent  estimate  of  its  value. 

Driven  from  the  field  of  morals,  the  saloon  and  brewery  advocates  sought 
the  domain  of  economics,  hoping  to  find  there  something  with  which  to  prop  their 
falling  house. 


■    I 


8  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

They  pointed  to  the  fact  that  every  saloonkeeper  was  compelled  to  keep  a 
building  in  which  to  carry  on  the  traffic. 

That  every  such  building  represented  tangible  property.  That  if  the  saloon- 
keeper did  not  himself  own  the  building,  he  paid  high  rental  for  it  to  him  who  did 
own  it.  That  these  buildings  were  usually  of  great  value  because  of  their  location 
in  the  heart  of  the  business  districts  of  towns  and  cities.. 

That  wherever  a  county  voted  "dry"  these  buildings  would  be  closed  and 
would*  remain  empty,  entailing  loss  of  rental  to  their  owner  and  commercial 
injury  to  the  town  or  city  in  which  they  were  situated.  That  in  the  larger  cities 
the  injury  would  be  substantial  and  permanent,  especially  in  the  towns  and  cities 
of  counties  like  Noble  and  Jackson,  each  with  25  saloons;  Howard,  with  t.'j;  De- 
catur and  Green,  each  with  29;  Fountain,  with  32;  Jefferson,  with  37;  Daviess, 
with  39;  Miami,  with  42;  Vermilion,  with  44;  Elkhart,  with  45;  Grant,  with  57; 
Delaware,  with  82,  and  Madison,  with  107. 

That  in  these  fourteen  counties  620  business  rooms  would  be  closed  and 
become  dead  property.  That  in  the  sixty-nine  counties  voting  "dry,"  989  places 
would  be  closed,  entailing  an  aggregate  loss  in  rental  alone  of  more  than  a  mil- 
lion dollars  annually. 

And  some  good  men  believed  them,  and  alarmed  for  their  financial  interests, 
voted  "wet." 

They  insistently  proclaimed  that  every  saloonkeeper  owned  stock  and  fix- 
tures used  in  the  traffic,  of  substantial  value,  aggregating  many  thousands  of 
dollars.  That  all  these  were  upon  the  tax  duplicates  of  the  respective  counties, 
townships,  towns  and  cities  where  situated,  bearing  their  share  of  the  cost  of 
county,  township,  town  and  city  government. 

That  wherever  a  county  voted  "dry"  these  valuable  stocks  and  fixtures  would 
be  removed  or  rendered  worthless,  and  would  fall  from  the  tax  duplicates,  entail- 
ing great  financial  loss  to  their  owners,  and  depleting  the  tax  duplicates  to  the 
extent  of  many  thousands  of  dollars. 

That  to  recoup  the  losses  to  their  revenues  consequent  upon  this  depletion 
of  the  tax  duplicate's,  counties,  townships,  town  and  cities  would  be  compelled  to 
increase  their  tax  rates  for  every  purpose. 

And  some  good  men  believed  them,  and,  alarmed  lest  they  should  be  called 
upon  to  bear  an  increased  burden  of  taxation,  they  voted  "wet." 

Under  the  law  $100  must  be  paid  by  every  successful  applicant  for  liquor 
license,  into  the  treasury  of  the  county  in  which  he  makes  application  for  license 
to  sell,  before  a  license  can  issue,  which  fee  becomes  a  part  of  the  school  tuition 
fund  in  such  county,  and  every  incorporated  town  is  authorized  to  charge  an  ad- 
ditional license  fee  of  not  more  than  $150,  and  every  incorporated  city  an  additional 
license  fee  of  not  more  than  $250,  as  such  town  or  city  may,  by  ordinance,  decree, 
such  fees  going  into  the  general  fund  of  the  municipality  to  which  they  are  paid. 

The  saloon  and  brewery  advocates  pointed  to  these  facts  and  declared  with 
emphasis  that  wherever  a  county  voted  "dry"  in  which  any  considerable  number 
of  saloons  were  situated,  tax  levies  for  tuition  purposes  in  the  townships  and  for 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  9 

corporation  purposes  in   the  towns  and  cities,  would  necessarily  be  greatly'  in- 
creased. 

They  pointed  out  that  Noble  county  would  lose  annually  $2,500  in  tuition 
revenue,  and  her  cities,  if  they  were  charging  the  full  license  fee  allowed  by  law, 
$6,250  in  corporation  revenue. 

That  the  county  of  Jackson  would  lose  annually  $2,500  in  tuition  revenue  and 
her  cities  $6,250  in  corporation  revenue. 

The  county  of  Howard,  $2,700  in  tuition  revenue,  her  towns  and  cities,  $6,750. 

The  county  of  Decatur,        $2,900;  her  cities,    $7,250. 

The  county  of  Greene,  $2,900;  her  cities,    $7,250. 

The  county  of  Fountain,       $3,200;  her  cities,     $8,000. 

The  county  of  Jefferson,      $3,70o;  her  cities,     $9,250. 

The  county  of  Daviess,         $3,90o;  her  cities,    $9,750. 

The  county  of  Miami,  $4,200;  her  cities,  $10,500. 

The  county  of  Vermilion,     $4,400;  her  cities,  $11,000. 

The  county  of  Elkhart,         $4,500;  her  cities,  $11,250. 

The  county  of  Grant,  $5, 700;  her  cities,  $14,250. 

The  county  of  Delaware,      $8,200;  her  cities,  $20,500. 

The  county  of  Madison,     $10,700;  her  cities,  $26,750. 
Total  annual  loss  of  tuition  revenue  to  fourteen  counties,  $48,500. 

Total  annual  loss  in  corporation  revenue  to  the  cities  in  fourteen  counties, 
$121,250. 

That  the  sixty-nine  counties  that  had  voted  "dry"  would  lose  annually 
tuition  revenues  aggregating  $98,900,  and  their  cities,  if  they  were  charging  the 
maximum  license  fee,  $247,250. 

That  these  losses  could  be  recouped  only  by  raising  the  tax  rate  for  tuition 
purposes  upon  all  the  property  remaining  on  the  tax  duplicate  in  every  county 
voting  "dry,"  and  the  corporation  tax  in  every  town  or  city  voting  "dry." 

And  some  good  men  believed  them,  and,  alarmed  lest  they  would  have  to 
bear  an  increased  taxation  for  school  tuition  purposes  in  the  county  and  corpora- 
tion purposes  in  the  city,  voted  to  continue  this  blood-money  source  of  revenue 
with  which  to  educate  their  children  and  meet  municipal  expenses. 

These  dire  prophecies  frightened  many  men.  Since  they  were  made  scarcely 
a  year  has  gone  by.  The  saloons  in  the  sixty-nine  counties  voting  "dry"  have 
scarcely  all  been  closed  a  year.  But,  brief  as  the  time  has  been,  we  are  able  now 
to  put  over  against  the  "wet"  prophecies  of  yesterday,  the  "dry"  facts  of  today, 
and  never  did  facts  work  greater  confusion  to  prophecies. 

The  989  business  rooms  where  last  year  saloons  were  operated,  and  which 
have  been  closed  by  the  votes  of  the  people  in  these  sixty-nine  counties,  have 
been  filled,  save  only  one  here  and  there  in  undesirable  quarters  of  the  town  or 
.  city  and  a  few  stubbornly  held  by  the  liquor  interests  in  the  hope  that  the  law 
under  which  they  were  closed  would  be  declared  unconstitutional  or  be  repealed 
by  the  general  assembly  now  to  be  elected,  or  the  verdict  of  the  electors  reversed 
It  the  next  county  local  option  election. 

Rents  have  not  decreased.    Property  has   not  depreciated  in  value.     On  the 


to  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

contrary,  every  legitimate  business  throughout  these  sixty-nine  counties  has  feiL 
the  impulse  and  tkrill  of  the  $10,000,000  that  have  been  diverted  this  year  from 
the  coffers  of  saloons  and  breweries  into  the  useful  channels  of  trade. 

Bank  deposits  have  increased,  store  bills  long  barred  by  the  statute  of  limi- 
tations have  been  paid,  and  cash  is  being  received  for  merchandise,  where  credit 
was  formerly  asked.  Saloon  stocks  have  disappeared  and  saloon  fixtures  have 
gone  back  to  the  breweries  that  owned  them.  But  the  tax  duplicates  of  the  "dry" 
counties  have  not  been  depleted;  they  have  been  increased.  Nor  have  tax  levies 
been  raised  more  frequently  in  ''dry"  counties,  townships,  towns  and  cities  than 
in  "wet"  counties,  townships,  towns  and  cities.  Indeed,  quite  the  reverse  is  true. 
They  have  been  decreased  more  frequently  in  "dry"  counties,  townships,  towns 
and  cities  than  in  "wet"  counties,  townships,  towns  and  cities. 
COUNTY  TAX  RATE  COMPARISONS. 

Of  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  in  the  state  the  tax  levy  laid  in  1909,  to  be 
paid  in  1910,  levied  by  the  respective  county  authorities  with  the  full  knowledge 
that  these  counties  were  "dry"  and  would  continue  to  be  so  throughout  the  year 
for  which  the  levy  was  made,  was  increased  in  but  twenty-five,  or  35  per  cent  of 
them,  as  follows: 

Bartholomew         Howard  Miami  Pike  Starke 

Crawford  Lawrence  Montgomery  Pulaski  Switzerland 

Grant  Madison  Ohio  Putnam  Union 

Hancock  Marshall  Orange  Rush  Vermilion 

Harrison  Martin  Parke  Scott  Washington 

Of  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  in  the  state,  the  tax  levy  laid  in  1909,  to 
be  paid  in  1910,  levied  by  the  respective  county  autorities,  was  increased  in  eleven. 
or  50  per  cent  of  them,  as  follows: 

Blackford  Floyd  Laporte 

Clark  Franklin  Porter  Spencer 

Dubois  Lake  Posey  Tippecanoe 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  counties  of  15  per  cent. 

Of  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  in  the  state,  the  tax  levy  laid  in  1909,  to  be 
paid  in  1910,  levied  by  the  respective  county  authorities  with  the  full  knowledge 
that  these  counties  were  "dry"  and  would  continue  to  be  so  throughout  the  year 
for  which  the  levy  was  made,  was  actually  reduced  in  twenty-nine,  or  41.4  per 
cent  of  them,  as  follows: 
Adams  Elkhart  Henry 

Benton  Fayette  Huntington 

Brown  Fountain  Jackson 

Clay  Fulton  Jay 

Clinton  Gibson  Jefferson 

Daviess  Hamilton  Johnson 

Of  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  in  the  state,  the  tax  levy  laid  in  1Q09,  to 
be  paid  in  1910  levied  by  the  respective  county  authorities,  was  decreased  in  four, 
or  18. 1  per  cent  of  them,  as  follows: 
Cass  St.  Joseph  Vanderburg  Vigo 


Newton 

Wabash 

Noble 

Warren 

Owen 

Wells 

Randolph 

White 

Shelby 

Whitley 

Tipton 

COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


II 


A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  counties  of  23,3  per  cent. 

Or,  the  county  tax  rate  in  seventy  "dry"  counties  has  been  increased  in  only 
35  per  cent  of  them,  but  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  the  tax  rat«  has  been 
increased  in  50  per  cent  of  them. 

Of  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  the  tax  rate  has  been  reduced  in  41.4  per  cent 
of  them,  but  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  the  tax  rate  has  been  reduced  in 
only  18. 1  per  cent  of  such  counties. 

"Dry"  Benton  ficcreased,  "Wet"  Blackford       increased. 

"Dry"  Clay  decreased.  "Wet"  Clark  increased. 

"Dry"  Daviess  decreased.  "Wet"  Dubois  increased. 

"Dry"  Elkhart  decreased.  "Wet"  Floyd  increased 

"Dry"  Fountain         decreased,  "Wet"  Franklin         increased 

"Dry"  Jefferson         decreased,  "Wet"  Lake  increased. 

"Dry"  Jackson  decreased,  "Wet"  Laporte  increased. 

"Dry"  Huntington    decreased.  "Wet"  Porter  ''ncreased. 

"Dry"  Gibson  decreased.  "Wet''  Posey  increased. 

"Dry"  Wabash  decreased,  "Wet"  Spencei  increased. 

"Dry"  Hamilton        decreased.  "Wet"  Tippecanoe    increased. 

The  three  counties  having  the  lowest  tax  rate  in  the  state  are  "dry"  counties. 

Berton.        Tr).6';c  on   the  $100. 

Hamilton,  25.65c  on  the  $100 

Marshall.    25.65c  on'  the  $100. 

The  three  counties  having  the  highest  tax  rate  in  the  state  are: 

"Dry"  Switzerland,  95.65c  on  the  $100. 

"WVt"  Crawford,       90.65c  on  the  $too. 

"Wet"  Perry,  86.65c  on  the  $100. 

TOWNSHIP  TAX  RATE  COMPARISONS. 

There  were  in  the  state  last  year  i,ot6  townships.  Of  these,  255  are  in  the 
twenty-two  "wet"  counties  of  the  state;  761  are  in  the  seventy  "dry"  counties 

Of  the  255  townships  in  "wet"  counties,  206,  or  80.78  per  cent  of  them,  in- 
creased their  total  tax  levy  laid  in  1909.  to  be  paid  in  1910. 

Of  the  761  townships  in  the  "dry"  counties  only  573,  or  75.43  per  cent,  in- 
creased their  total  tax  levy. 

A  difference  of  5.35  per  cent  in  favor  of  the  townships  in  "dry"  counties. 

Of  the  255  townships  in  "wet"  counties,  thirty-three,  or  12.94  per  cent  of 
them,  decreased  their  total  tax  levy  laid  in  1909,  to  be  paid  in  1910. 

Of  the  761  townships  in  "dry"  counties,  154,  or  20.24  per  cent  of  them,  de- 
creased their  total  tax  levy. 

A  difference  of  7.30  per  cent  in  favor  of  the  townships  in  "dry"  counties. 

This  favorable  comparison  in  behalf  of  the  townships  in  "dry"  counties 
holds  good  even  in  the  tax  levies  laid  for  tuition  purposes, — the  one  rate  of  ail 
the  others  the  saloon  and  brewery  advocates  were  most  certain  would  have  to  be 
raised  in   every  "dry"  county. 


12  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

Of  the  255  townships  in  "wet"  counties,  104,  or  40.78  per  cent  of  them,  in- 
creased the  levy  laid  for  tuition  purposes  in  1909,  to  be  paid  in  1910. 

Of  the  761  townships  in  "dry"  counties  only  309,  or  40.47  per  cent  of  them, 
increased  their  tuition  levy. 

A  difference  of  .31  per  cent  in  favor  of  the  townships  in  "dry"  counties;  a 
slight  difference,  but  quite  sufficient  to  coufound  and  cover  with  confusion  the 
prophecies   of  "wet"  advocates. 

Of  the  255  townships  in  "wet"  counties  only  forty-two,  or  16.47  per  cent  of 
them,  decreased  the  tax  levy  for  tuition  p«rposes  laid  in  1909,  to  be  paid  in  1910. 

Of  the  761  townships  in  "dry"  counties,  147,  or  19.31  per  cent  of  them,  de- 
creased their  tuition  levy. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  townships  in  "dry"  counties  of  2.84  per  cent. 

In  "dry"  Jefferson  one  out  of  ten  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
one  township  decreased  the  levy. 

In  "wet"  Floyd  three  out  of  four  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
none  decreased  it. 

In  "dry"  Madison,  a  county  in  which  107  saloons  were  closed,  only  four  out 
of  fourteen  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and  one  decreased  it. 

In  "wet"  Allen  nine  out  of  twenty  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
one   decreased    it. 

In  "dry"  Greene  seven  out  of  fifteen  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy, 
and   three   decreased   it. 

In  "wet"  Knox  eight  out  of  ten  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
none  decreased  it. 

In  "dry"  Gibson  four  out  of  ten  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
three  decreased  it. 

In  "wet"  Posey  five  out  of  ten  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
none   decreased   it. 

In  "dry"  Crawford  no  township  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and  one  de- 
creased it. 

In  "wet"  Vanderburg  five  out  of  seven  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy, 
and  none  decreased  it. 

In  "dry"  Wabash  two  out  of  seven  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
one  decreased  it. 

In  "wet"  Wayne  eight  out  of  fifteen  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy, 
and  three  decreased  it. 

In  "dry"  Shelby  five  out  of  fourteen  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy, 
and  four  decreased  it. 

In  "wet"  Marion  six  out  of  eight  townships  increased  the  tuition  levy,  and 
none  decreased  it. 

CITY  TAX  RATE  COMPARISONS. 

Turning  to  the  cities  of  the  state,  the  facts  are  equally  conclusive  against 
the  contention  that  the  elimination  of  the  saloon  from  cities  means  an  inevitable 
raise  in   the  tax  levy. 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


13 


I  submit  a  comparison  as  to  the  levy  in  117  towns  and  cities  of  the  state: 
Thirty-one  "wet"  towns  and  cities: 


Aurora 

Brookville 

Batesville 

Crown  Point 

Chesterton 

Cannelton 


East  Chicago 
EvansviMe 
Fort  Wayne 
Gary 

Hartford  City 
Huntingburg 


Hammond 

Indianapolis 

JeflFersonville 

Lawrenceburg 

Laporte 

Lafayette 


Logansport 
Michigan  City 
Mt.  Vernon 
Mishawaka 
Montpelier 
New  Albany 


Rockport 
Richmond 
South  Bend 
Tell  City 
Terre  Haute 
Valparaiso 
Whiting 


Eighty-six 
Attica 
Anderson 
Auburn 
Albion 
Alexandria 
Boswell 
Brazil 

Brownstown 
Bloomington 
Bloomfield 
Boonville 
Bedford 
Bluffton 
Columbus 
Corydon 
Connersville 
Covington 


"dry"  towns  and  cities: 
Crawfordsville       Huntington 


North  Judson       Salem 

Clinton  Kokomo  New  Castle  Shoals 

Columbia  City       Knox  Newport  Spencer 

Decatur  Kendalville  Noblesville  Seottsburg 

Delphi  Kentland  Portland  Shelbyville  v 

Danville  Knightstown         Petersburg  Sullivan 

English  Lagrange  Princeton  Seymour 

Elkhart  Ligonier  Paoli  Sheridan 

Elwood  Linton  Peru  Tipton 

Fowler  Lebanon  Plymouth  Union  City 

Frankfort  Liberty  Pendleton  Vevay 

Fairmount  Martinsville  Plainfield  Veedersbnrg 

Greensburg  Muncie  Rensselaer  Warsav/ 

Goshen  Mitchell  Rockville  Winchester 

Gas   City  Marion  Rushville  Williamsport 

Greenfield  Monticello  Rochester  Winamac 

Greeneastle  Nashville  Rising  Sun  Wabash 

Washington 
If  we  include  the  township  levy  made  by  the  townships  in  which  these  cities 
are  situated,  of  the  thirty-one  "wet"  cities,  twenty-one. 


Aurora 
Brookville 
Batesville 
Crown  Point 


East  Chicago 
Fort  Wayne 
Gary 
Hartford   Citv 


Indianapolis 
Jeffersonville 
Lawrenceburg 
Michigan   City 


Mt.  Vernon 
Mishawaka 
Rockport 
Richmond 


or  67.74  per  cent  of  them,  increased  their  total  tax  levy: 
Of  the  eighty-six  "dry"  cities,  fifty-two. 


Auburn 

Albion 

Alexandria 

Bloomfield 

Boonville 

Bedford 

Bluffton 

Clinton 


Connersville 

Covington 

Crawfordsville 

Danville 

Elkhart 

Elwood 

Fowler 

Frankfort 


Fairmount 

Greensburg 

Goshen 

Gas  City 

Greeneastle 

Greenfield 

Huntington 

Kentland 


Kendalville 

Knox 

Knightstown 

Liberty 

Linton 

Muncie 

Monticello 

Mitchell 


South    Bend 
Terre  Haute 
fell  City 
Valparaiso 
Whiting. 


North  Juflson 

Noblesville 

Newport 

Pendleton 

Plymouth 

Peru 

Princeton 

Paoli 


14 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


Rockville         Rensselaer       Seymour  Veedersburg  Wabash  Winamac, 

Rising  Sun      Sheridan  Tipton  Washington    Williamsport  Rochester 

or  60.46  per  cent,  increased  their  tax  levy: 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  cities  of  7.28  per  cent. 

Of  the  thirty-one  "wet"  cities,  seven, 
Chesterton  Hammond  Logansport  Montpelier, 

Huntingburg  Laporte  Lafayette 

or  22.58  per  cent,  decreased  their  total  tax  rate. 

Of  tke  eighty-six  "dry"  cities,  thirty-two, 


Attica 

Anderson 

Btfswell 

Brazil 

Brownstown 

Bloomington 


Columbus 

Corydon 

Decatur 

Delphi 

English 

Kokomo 


Lebanon 

Lagrange 

Ligonier 

Martinsville 

Marion 

New  Castle 


Plainfield 

Petersburg 

Portland 

Rnshville 

Spencer 

Salem 

Shclbyville 


Sullivan 

Scottsburg 

Shoals 

Union    City 

Vevay 

Winchester 

Warsaw, 


or  37.21  per  cent,  decreased  their  total  tax  levy: 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  cities  of  14.63  per  cen^ 

But  of  these  "wet"  cities  increasing  their  total  tax  rate   the   increase  was 

due  to  an  increased  township  levy  for  gravel   road   or  poor   purposes,   which    i 

included  in  the  above  figures,  in  the  following  cities: 

Crown    Point  Hartford  City  Lawrenceburg 

Fort  Wayne  Indianapolis  Valparaiso. 

six   in   all,   leaving   of   the   twenty-one   "wet"   cities    which    increased    their   levy, 

fifteen  in  which  the  increase  was  due  wholly  to  the  city  levy. 

On  the  other  hand,  of  the  seven  "wet"  cities  decreasing  their  levy,  the  re 
duction  was  due  to  a  decrease  in  the  township  levy  for  gravel  road  purposes,  in 
one  city,  Chesterton,  leaving  six  of  the  seven  "wet"  cities  reducing  the  tax  levy, 
where  the  reduction  was  due  to  a  decrease  in  the  total  city  levy.  To  these  six 
should  be  added  the  six  cities  just  named,  making  twelve  "wet"  cities  in  all, 
which  actually  reduced  their  tax  rate. 

To  the  fifteen  "wet"  cities  heretofore  named,  increasing  the  city  rate  ex- 
clusive of  the  township  rate,  should  bemadded  Chesterton,  whose  city  rate,  exclud- 
ing the  township  levy  for  gravel  road  purposes,  was  actually  increased,  making  .1 
total  of  sixteen  "wet"  cities  out  of  thirty-one,  whose  total  city  levy  was  increased. 

Of  the  fifty-two  "dry"  cities  increasing  their  tax  levy,  the  increase  was  due 
to  an  increase  in  the  township  levy  for  gravel  road  and  poor  purposes  in  which 
they  are  situated,  in  thirteen  cities. 


Alexandria 

Bluffton 

Covington 


leaving  only  thirty-nine   "dry' 
increased. 


Danville  Monticello  Sullivan 

Grecncastle  Newport  Tipton 

Kentland  Seymour  Veedersburg 

Wabash, 
cities   in    which    the    total    city    levy   was    actnallv 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  15 

These,  therefore,  should  be  deducted  from  the  "dry"  cities  increatsing  their 
city  levy,  leaving  only  thirty-nine  in  all. 

Of  the  thirty-two  "dry"  cities  heretofore  named  as  reducing  their  tax  rate, 
the  decrease  in  none  of  them  was  due  to  a  decreased  township  levy. 

Finally  therefore,  of  the  thirty-one  "wet"  cities,  sixteen,  or  51.61  per  cent 
of  them,  have  increased  their  total  levy. 

Of  the  eighty-six  "dry"  cities  only  thirty-nine,  or  45.35  per  cent  of  them, 
have  increased  their  total  levy. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  cities  of  6.26  per  cent. 

Of  the  thirty-one  "wet"  cities,  twelve,  or  38.71  per  cent,  decreased  their 
total  levy. 

Of  the  eighty-six  "dry"  cities,  forty-five,  or  52.32  per  cent,  decreased  their 
total  levy. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  cities  of  13.61  per  cent. 

In  a  number  of  "dry"  cities  the  increase,  while  not  wholly  due  to  a»  in- 
crease in  the  township  levy,  was  substantially  due  to  that  cause,  as  in  the  city  of 
Muncie,  where  the  total  increase  was  58c,  and  v/here  the  increase  in  the  township 
levy  for  gravel  road  purposes  was  45c.  This  also  applies  in  substantial  measure 
to  the  cities  of  Huntington,  Portland  Elwood,  Pendleton  and  Sheridan. 

TOWN  TAX  RATE  COMPARISONS. 

Out  of  forty-four  "wet"  towns,  eleven,  or  25  per  cent,  reduced  their  total 
tax  levy. 

Out  of  342  "dry"  towns,  112,  or  nearly  33  per  cent,  reduced  their  total  tax 
levy. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  towns  of  nearly  7  per  cent. 

Out  of  forty-four  "wet"  towns,  eight,  or  a  little  over  18  per  cent,  increased 
their  total  tax  levy. 

Out  of  342  "dry"  towns,  only  forty-seven,  or  a  little  less  than  13  per  cent, 
increased  their  tax  levy. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  towns  of  almost  5  per  cent. 

I  do  not  claim  that  these  reductions  in  the  tax  levies  in  "dry"  counties  and 
"dry"  cities  and  the  favorable  comparison  made  between  such  reductions  and 
reductions  made  in  "wet"  counties  and  "wet"  cities,  are  due  wholly  to  the  elimina- 
tion of  the  saloon. 

But  I  do  claim  that  they  utterly  and  conclusively  overthrow  the  contention 
of  the  saloon  and  brewery  advocates  that  the  elimination  of  the  saloon  means  in- 
creased tax  rates  in  either  counties,  townships  or  cities. 

The  period  of  trial  has  been  brief,  but  the  fact  of  experience  in  the  time 
that  has  elapsed  puts  every  "wet"  prophecy  to  confusion  and  vindicates  the  judg- 
ment and  wisdom  of  those  who  obtained  the  county  local  option  law  and 
abundantly  justifies  the  law  from  every  economic  standpoint. 

Another  "wet"  prophecy  has  been  refuted  by  the  facts  of  experience.  Last 
year  we  were  assurred  by  every  "wet"  advocate  that  wherever  a  county  voted 
"dry"  and  the  saloons  were  eliminated,  drunkenness  and  debauchery  would  in- 


i6  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

crease;  that  conditions  succeeding  the  voting  of  the  county  "dry"  would  be 
worse  than  under  the  old  "wet"  regime. 

And  some  good  men  believed  them,  and,  through  fear  of  bad  conditions  that 
might  obtain  if  the  county  became  "dry,"  voted  "wet." 

We  are  now  closing  the  first  year  under  "dry"  conditions  in  seventy  coun- 
ties, and  I  am  in  possession  of  statistics  gh^ing  the  number  of  persons  jailed  for 
intoxication  in  the  several  counties  of  the  state,  and  the  cost  of  their  imprison- 
ment in  the  way  of  sheriffs'  in-and-out  fees  and  for  board,  for  the  first  eight 
months,  ending  May  31,  1910,  of  the  present  fiscal  year,  which  began  October  i, 
1909,  and  which  will  end  September  30,  1910. 

These  statistics  are  compiled  from  official  reports  made  to  the  state  board  of 
charities  by  the  several  county  authorities.  From  these  I  subwiit  comparisons 
between  the  "dry"  and  "wet"  counties,  as  to  such  imprisonments,  and  as  to  the 
cost  to  such  counties  on  account  of  such  imprisonments. 

There  were  imprisoned  for  intoxication  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  in 
the  eight  months  named,  5,569  persons,  as  against  4,541  persons  for  the  like 
period  in  the  fiscal  year  1909;  an  increase  of  1,028,  more  than  18  per  cent. 

That  is  to  say,  that  while  100  persons  were  jailed  for  intoxication  in  these 
twenty-two  "wet"  counties  the  first  eight  months  of  the  fiscal  year  beginning 
October  i,  1908,  118  were  jailed  the  first  eight  months  of  the  present  fiscal  year. 

In  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  there  were  jailed  for  intoxication  in  eight 
months  ending  May  31,  1910,  only  2,865  persons,  as  against  4,010  for  the  like 
period  in  the  last  fiscal  year,  a  decrease  of  1,145, — more  than  28  per  cent. 

Or,  where,  in  these  seventy  "dry"  counties,  100  persons  were  jailed  for  in- 
toxication in  the  first  eight  months  of  the  last  fiscal  year,  only  seventy-two  were 
jailed  in  the  first  eight  months  of  this  fiscal  year. 

Or,  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  with  an  aggregate  population  of  929,059, 
under  the  census  of  1900(1  use  the  census  report  for  1900  because  I  am  unable  as 
yet  to  get  the  report  from  the  census  taken  this  year),  for  the  eight  months  end- 
ing May  31,  1910,  jailed  5,569  persons  for  intoxication. 

The  seventy  "dry"  counties,  with  an  aggregate  population  of  1,587,403, 
jailed  but  2,865. 

A  difference  of  2,704  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  counties,  thoufeh  their  population 
is  658,344  greater  than  that  of  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties. 

Or,  in  these  seventy  "dry"  counties  but  little  over  one-half  as  many  persons 
were  jailed  for  intoxication  within  the  first  eight  months  of  the  present  fiscal 
year,  as  were  jailed  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties,  though  the  population  of 
the  seventy  "dry"  counties  is  more  than  one  and  a  half  times  greater  than  that  of 
the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties. 

Or,  where  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  increased  the  number  of  persons 
jailed  for  intoxication  18  per  cent,  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  decreased  the 
number  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication  by  28  per  cent,  a  difference  in  favor  of 
the  "dry"  counties  of  46  per  cent. 

It  may  be  urged  that  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  contain  the  large  cities 
of  the  state,  where  the  population  is  dense  and  congested,  and  where  conditions 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


17 


of  idleness  and  poverty  are  such  as  to  raise  intoxication  to  the  maximum,  while 
the  seventy  "dry"  counties  are  largely  rural,  with  sparse  population  and  wide 
separation  of  habitation,  and  where  the  conditions  make  for  the  minimum  of 
iMtoxication. 

But  whatever  the  importance  of  these  conditions  may  be,  they  wholly  fail 
to  account  for  the  difference  in  the  number  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication 
found  between  the  "dry"  and  "wet"  counties  of  the  state.  The  comparison  of  in- 
crease is  made  not  only  between  "dry"  and  "wet"  counties,  but  between  "wet" 
counties  and  the  same  "wet"  counties  for  the  same  period  of  the  two  fiscal  years, 
and  between  "dry"  counties  and  the  same  "dry"  counties  for  like  periods.  The 
"wet"  counties,  compared  with  themselves,  have  increased  18  per  cent,  while  the 
"dry"  counties,  compared  with  themselves,  have  decreased  28  per  cent. 

Or,  to  put  it  another  way:  Of  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  the  number 
jailed  for  the  first  eight  months  of  the  present  fiscal  year,  fifteen,  or  70  per  cent 
of  them,  increased  the  number  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication,  over  the  same 
period  for  the  last  fiscal  year. 

While  of  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  only  sixteen,  or  23  per  cent  of  them, 
increased  the  number  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication,  over  the  same  period  for 
the  last  fiscal  year. 

A  difference  of  47  per  cent  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  counties. 

Of  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties,  only  seven,  or  30  per  cent  of  them,  de- 
creased the  number  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication  during  said  period,  as  com- 
pared with  the  same  period  last  year. 

Of  the  seventy  "dry"  counties,  forty-seven,  or  67  per  cent  of  them,  decreased 
the  number  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  "dry"  counties  of  37  per  cent. 
To  illustrate: 


"Dry" 

Clay 

decreased 

the 

number 

41 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Cass 

increased 

the 

number 

178 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Bartholomew 

decreased 

the 

number 

2 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Blackford 

increased 

the 

number  367 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Adams 

decreased 

the 

number 

50 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Porter 

increased 

the 

number 

3 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Fountain 

decreased 

the 

number 

68 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Tippecanoe 

increased 

the 

number 

67 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Huntington 

decreased 

the 

number 

67 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Knox 

increased 

the 

number 

23 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Madison 

decreased 

the 

number 

31 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

St.  Joseph 

increased 

the 

number 

41 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Delaware 

decreased 

the 

number 

56 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Vanderburg 

increased 

the 

number 

52 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Hancock 

decreased 

the 

number 

53 

per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Wayne 

increased 

the 

number 

22 

per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Martin 

decreased 

the 

number 

61 

per  cent. 

iS 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


"Wet" 

Posey 

increased    the  number 

17  per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Elkhart 

decreased    the  number 

45  per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Allen 

increased    the  number 

48  per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Grant 

decreased   the  number 

43  per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Lake 

increased    the  number 

62  per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Shelby 

decreased    the  number 

65  per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Laporte 

increased    the  number 

12  per  cent. 

"Dry" 

Vermilion 

decreased   the  number 

50  per  cent. 

"Wet" 

Clark 

increased    the  number 

20  per  cent. 

In  "wet"  Knox  county  alone  650  persons  were  jailed  for  in 

toxication  in  the 

first  eight  months  of  the  present  fiscal  year,  while 

in  forty-four 

"dry"  counties, 

Adams 

Harrison 

Jennings 

Parke 

Union 

Brown 

Hendricks              Jefferson 

Pike 

Vermilion 

Benton 

Hancock 

Lagrange 

Randolph 

Whitley 

Clinton 

Huntington            Martin 

Rush 

White 

Clay 

Hamilton 

Marshall 

Scott 

Warren 

Crawford 

Jasper 

Newton 

Starke 

Warrick 

Dekalb 

Jay 

Noble 

Switzerland 

Wells 

Fountain 

Johnson 

Owen 

Steuben 

Washington, 

Gibson 

Jackson 

Ohio 

Tipton 

only  615  pel 

sons  were  jail 

ed  for  intoxication  an  excess  in  "wet" 

Knox  of  thirty- 

five  over  the  number  jailed  in  forty-four  "dry"  counties. 

Difference  in  population  here  cannot  account  for  the  difference  in  these 
figures,  since,  of  the  forty-four  "dry"  counties  named,  one.  Clay,  has  a  population 
greater  than  that  of  Knox,  and  a  number,  Clinton,  Gibson,  Huntington,  Hamil- 
ton, Randolph  and  others,  have  each  almost  as  large  a  population  as  Knox.  The 
population  of  Knox  county  is  32,746,  and  of  the  forty-four  "dry"  counties, 
847,132. 

In  the  eleven  "dry"  counties  of  Clinton,  Clay,  Daviess,  Elkhart,  Gibson, 
Huntington,  Hamilton,  Howard,  Kosciusko,  Montgomery  and  Randolph,  with  a 
population  of  342,092,  and  two  of  which.  Clay  and  Elkhart,  each  have  a  population 
greater  than  that  of  Knox,  only  495  persons  were  jailed  in  the  period  named,  for 
intoxication,  as  against  650  in  "wet"  Knox,  with  a  population  of  32,746. 

Or,  Knox  county,  with  only  10  per  cent  of  the  population  of  these  eleven 
"dry"  counties,  jailed  in  the  first  eight  months  of  the  present  fiscal  year,  for 
intoxication,  155  more  persons  than  were  jailed  in  the  eleven  counties  named. 

The  "dry"  counties  of  Elkhart,  with  a  population  of  45,052;  Delaware,  with 
a  population  of  49,624;  Madison,  with  a  population  of  70,470;  a  total  population 
of  165,046,  jailed  but  400  persons  for  intoxication  during  the  period  named,  but 
"wet"  Knox,  with  a  population  of  only  32,746,  jailed  650  persons,  250  more  per- 
sons than  these  three  "dry"  counties. 

Or,  Knox  county,  with  less  than  20  per  cent  of  the  population,  jailed  more 
than  50  per  cent  more  persons  than  the  three  larger  populated  counties  of  Elk- 
hart, Delaware  and  Madison. 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  19 

"Wet"  Vigo  county,  with  a  population  of  only  62,035,  jailed  in  the  first 
eight  months  of  this  fiscal  year,  889  persons  for  intoxication. 

The  forty-four  "dry"  counties  named  above,  with  the  counties  of  Carroll, 
Decatur,  Greene,  Howard,  Putnam  and  Shelby  added,  fifty  in  all,  with  a  popula- 
tion of  991,677,  jailed  only  990  persons  for  intoxication  in  the  time,  only  one  more 
than  "wet"  Vigo  county. 

The  five  "wet"  counties  of  Allen,  Knox,  St.  Joseph,  Vanderburg  and  Vigo, 
with  a  population  of  302,691,  jailed  for  intoxication  1,591  more  persons  than  the 
forty-four  "dry"  counties,  named  above,  with  Elkhart,  Grant  and  Madison  added, 
forty-seven  in  all,  with  an  aggregate  population  of  1,021,918. 

Or,  the  five  "wet"  counties  named,  with  less  than  30  per  cent  of  the  popula- 
tion of  the  forty-seven  "dry"  counties  namec!,  jailed  137  per  cent  more  persons. 

The  four  "wet"  counties  of  St.  Joseph,  Vanderburg,  Vigo  and  Knox,  with  a 
population  of  225,421,  jailed  2,354  persons  for  intoxication. 

The  four  "dry"  counties  of  Elkhart,  Delaware.  Madison  and  Grant,  with  a 
population  of  219,739  jailed  only  603  persons  for  intoxication;  a  diflFerence  of  i,75i- 

Or,  the  four  "wet"  counties  named,  with  a  population  of  only  5,682  in 
excess  of  that  of  the  four  "dry"  counties  named,  jailed  more  than  270  per  cent 
more  persons,  almost  four  to  one. 

The  five  "wet"  counties  of  Allen.  Knox,  St.  Joseph.  Vanderburg  and  Vigo, 
with  a  population  of  302.691,  jailed  2,749  persons,  only  116  fewer  than  the  entire 
seventy  "dr)'-"  counties,  with  a  population  of  1,587,403. 

Or,  the  seventy  "dry"  counties,  with  more  than  five  times  the  population  of 
Allen,  Knox,  St.  Joseph,  Vanderburj^  and  Vigo,  jailed  for  this  oflFense  only  ti6 
more  persons. 

COST  OF  IMPRISONMENTS   FOR   INTOXICATION. 

The  difference  in  the  cost  of  sheriflFs*  in-and-out  fees  and  the  board  on 
account  of  persons  jailed,  is  equally  confusing  to  saloon  and  brewery  advocates. 

In  the  first  eight  months  of  this  fiscal  year,  sheriffs'  in-and-out  fees  on 
account  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication,  aggregated  in  the  state  $3,186.50;  in 
the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties,  $1,774.65;  in  the  seventy  "dry"  counties,  $1,411.90: 
an  excess  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  over  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  of 
$362.75. 

The  board  for  persons  jailed  on  account  of  intoxication  in  the  entire  state 
during  the  period  named  aggregated  $23,197.78. 

The  board  for  persons  jailed  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  aggregated 
$14,849.68. 

The  board  for  persons  jailed  in  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  aggregated 
$8,348.10. 

Excess  in  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  over  the  seventy  "dry"  counties, 
$6,501.58. 

Fees  and  board  for  persons  jailed  on  account  of  intoxication  in  the  entire 
state  for  the  period  named,  aggregated  $26,384.33. 

Fees  and  board  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties.  $16,624.33. 


20  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

Fees  and  board  in  the  seventy  "dry"  counties,  $9,760.00. 

A  difference  in  favor  of  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  of  $6,864.33. 

And  this,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  have  an 
aggregate  population  of  1,587,403,  as  against  a  population  of  only  927,059  in  the 
"wet"  counties. 

"Wet"  Vigo  county,  with  a  population  of  but  62,035,  paid  out  for  board 
alone,  on  account  of  persons  jailed  for  intoxication,  $2,001.60,  only  $46.93  less 
money  than  the  fourteen  counties  of 

Clinton  Elkhart  Howard  Kosciusko  Randolph 

Clay  Greene  Huntington  Montgomery  Wabash, 

Daviess  Gibson  Hamilton  Madison 

paid  out  on   account   of  both   in-and-out   fees  and   board,  with   a  population    of 
469,327 — 7J^  times  greater. 

Or,  Vigo  alone,  with  a  population  of  62,035,  paid  out  for  board  alone  $2,001,60,  or 
$354.02  more  than  the  forty  "dry"  counties  heretofore  named,  with  a  population  of 
733.079,  paid  out  for  both  in-and-out  fees  and  board,  and  only  $20.48  less  than  these 
forty  counries  paid  out  with  Clinton,  Jefferson,  Randolph  and  Clay  added,  forty-four  in 
all,  with  a  population  of  847,132,  more  than  twelve  times  greater. 

The  "wet"  counties  of  St.  Joseph,  Vanderburg,  Knox  and  Allen,  with  a  population 
of  302,691,  paid  out  an  account  of  fees  and  board,  $8,329.87.  The  fourty-four  "dry" 
counties  heretofore  named,  with  Grant  and  Madison  added,  with  an  aggregate  popula- 
tion of  1,021,919,  paid  out  $3,960,  on  account  of  board  and  fees,  a  difference  in  favor 
of  the  fourty-four  "dry"  counties,  of  $4,369.39. 

Or,  "wet"  St.  Joseph,  Vanderburg,  Vigo,  Knox  and  Allen,  with  less  than  30  per 
cent  of  the  population  of  the  forty-seven  counties  named  above,  paid  out  no  per  cent 
more  fees  and  board. 

"Wet"  Knox  county,  with  a  population  of  but  32,946,  paid  out  for  fees  and  board, 
$1,538.  70. 

The  eleven  "dry"  counties  of: 
Clinton  Elkhart  Hamilton  Montgomery 

Clay  Gibson  Howard  Randolph 

Daviess  Huntington  Kosciusko 

with  a  population  of  342,092,  paid  out  $1,454.63,  a  difference  of  $84.07  in  favor  of  the 
eleven  "dry"  counties. 

Or,  "wet"  Knox  county,  with  only  10  per  cent  of  the  population  of  these  eleven 
"dry"  counties,  paid  out  $84.07  more  money. 

Of  these  eleven  counties,  two.  Clay  and  Elkhart,  exceed  Knox  county  in  popu- 
lation, and  none  of  the  others  are  substantially  less  than  Knox  in  population. 

The  "dry"  counties  of  Elkhart,  with  a  population  of  45,052;  Delaware,  with  a 
ropulation  of  49,624;  Madison,  with  a  population  of  70,470;  a  total  population  of  165,- 
046,  paid  out  $183.30  less  on  account  of  in-and-out  fees  and  board,  thian  Knox  county, 
with  a  population  of  32,746. 

Or,  Knox  county,  with  less  than  20  per  cent  of  the  population  of  the  three  "dry" 
counties  named,  paid  out  $183.20  mere  in  the  way  of  sheriffs*  fees  and  board. 

"Dry"  Delaware  county,  with  a  population  of  49,624;  "dry"  Grant,  with  a  popu- 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  mDIANA  21 

lation  of  54,693;  a  total  population  of  104^17,  paid  out,  on  account  of  fees  and  board, 
$1461.20.  "Wet"  Knox  countj%  with  only  32,746  population,  paid  -out  $1,538.70,  or 
$77.51  more. 

"Dry"  Delaware  county,  with  a  population  of  49,624;  "dry"  Madison,  with  a 
population  of  70,470;  a  total  population  of  120,094,  paid  out  on  account  of  fees  and 
board,  $1,229.20.  "Wet"  Knox  county,  with  a  population  of  32,746,  paid  out  on  account 
of  fees  and  board,  $1,538.70,  or  $309.50  more  than  "dry"  Delaware  and  Madison. 

"Dry"  Grant,  with  a  population  of  54,693;  ''dry"  Madison,  with  a  population  of 
70,470;  a  total  population  of  125,163,  paid  out  on  account  of  fees  and  board,  $1,186.40. 
"Wet"  Knox  county,  with  a  population  of  32,746,  paid  out  on  account  of  fees  and 
board,  $1,538.70,  or  $352.30  more  than  "dry"  Grant  and  Madison. 

There  have  been,  of  course,  and  still  are  infractions  of  the  law  in  some  of  the 
"dry"  cities  of  the  state,  perhaps  in  all  of  them,  but  they  are  as  nothing  compared  with 
previous  infractions  of  the  license  law  in  the  same  cities,  or  with  present  infractions 
of  the  license  law  in  the  "wet"  cities  of  the  state. 

There  were  more  infractions  of  the  license  law  in  the  single  city  of  Indianapolis 
on  last  Labor  Day  than  there  have  been  infractions  of  the  local  option  law  in  the 
eighty-six  "dry"  cities  of  the  state  during  the  whole  year.  On  that  day  700  saloons 
ran  open  in  Indianapolis  from  dawn  until  11  o'clock  at  night,  without  interruption  or 
hinderance,  thoungh  the  law  forbade  their  opening  at  all.  Every  drink  sold  in  the 
eighteen  hours  of  that  day  by  anyone  of  the  700  saloons  of  that  city,  was  a  violation 
of  the  law.  There  were  on  the  streets  of  the  city  probably  75,000  people.  The  traffic 
must  have  been  large.  The  mayor  of  the  cit3'  said  to  me  personally  within  the  week 
that  it  w^as  utterly  impossible  to  close  the  saloons  and  prevent  infractions  of  the  license 
law  in  Indianapolis  on  that  day. 

And  this  is  the  traffic  that  demands  the  repeal  of  the  local  option  law,  on  the 
ground  that  it  cannot  be  enforced  and  because  its  violation  is  so  frequent  as  to  bring 
the  law  into  disrepute!  If  that  contention  is  sound,  and  a  frequent  violation  of  a 
statute  just  reason  for  its  repeal,  thien  by  the  same  token  the  license  law  should  be 
repealed,  all  restrictions  be  removed,  and  the  traffic  made  free,  for,  where  the  local 
option  law  is  violated  once  in  the  seventy  "drv"  counties  of  the  state,  the  license  law 
is  violated  a  hundred  times  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  of  the  state. 

I  do  not  contend  that  the  local  option  law  is  never  violated.  I  know  it  is.  But 
I  know  of  no  law,  human  or  divine,  with  a  "thou  shalt  not"  in  it  that  is  not  sometimes 
violated.  There  is  not  a  clause  in  the  Decalogue  that  is  not  violated  every  day  by 
some  one,  some  where.  But  because  of  that  thoughtful  men  do  not  petition  the  Throne 
of  Grace  for  a  repeal  of  the  Ten  Commandments  and  the  removal  of  all  restraint  from 
human  kind. 

I  know  some  intoxicants  are  sold  in  the  "dry"  cities  of  the  state,  but  the  "wettest" 
"dry"  city  in  Indiana  is  infinitely  "drier"  than  the  "driest"  "wet"  city.  The  difference 
in  the  quantity  used  in  the  "dry"  tnd  "wet"  cities  is  the  difference  between  the  freight 
car  and  the  suit-case,  between  the  bottle  and  the  barrel. 

I  know  that  local  option  does  not  perfectly  prohibit  the  traffic,  but  it  comes  quite 
as  near  prohibiting  it  as  the  license  law  comes  to  regulating  it  Roth  laws  are  broken, 
and  broken  by  the  same  people. 


22  COUNTY  OPTION   TN  INDIANA 

Bad  as  the*  conditions  are  in  the  twenty-two  "wet"  counties  of  the  state,  the 
actual  conditions  are  worse.  The  figures  do  ti-t  tell  the  whole  truth.  In  "wet"  cities 
men  are  arrested  and  jailed  for  intoxication  oniy  when  noisy  and  troublesome  and  as 
a  last  resort.  They  are  concealed  and  housed  in  saloons  and  in  back  rooms.  In  some 
of  the  "wet"  cities  other  than  county  seat  cities  no  record  is  kept  of  many  of  those  who 
are  jailc*  for  intoxication,  every  effort  being  made  to  minimize  the  facts  as  to  drunk- 
enness, while  in  "dry"  cities  every  drunken  man  is  paraded  and  the  fact  of  his  intox- 
ication made  much  of.  There  are  no  saloons  in  which  he  can  be  housed  and  sheltered. 
The  law  against  drunkenness  on  the  streets  is  much  more  strictly  enforced.  There- 
fore, the  contrast  between  the  "wet"  and  the  "dry"  counties  as  to  the  number  of  per- 
sons jailed  for  intoxication,  the  amount  of  drunkenness  and  the  expense  of  imprison- 
ments for  intoxication  is  really  greater  than  that  sliown  by  these  figures. 

REPEAL  PROPOFF.D. 

They  now  proposed  to  repeal  this  beneficent  law — ^to  repeal  it  before  it  is  fairly 
tried,  before  it  has  had  time  to  fully  justify  its  being.  Alarmed  by  the  use  the  people 
have  made  of  it,  by  its  effectiveness  and  by  the  remarkable  showing  that  has  been 
made  under  it,  they  dare  not  let  it  live  until  its  fruit  is  ripened  and  its  harvest  gath- 
ered.   They  seek,  therefore,  to  kill  it  in  its  infancy,  before  it  grows  to  manhood. 

Too  cowardly  to  attack  the  principle  on  which  it  rests,  afraid  to  advocate  your 
complete  disfranchisement,  they  seek  to  circumscribe  and  limit  your  franchise  by  de- 
creasing the  area  of  the  unit  in  which  it  may  be  exercised.  Instead  of  county  option, 
they  offer  you  township  and  city  option.  Two  years  ago  they  opposed  the  principle  in 
any  form.  They  were  against  option  by  ballot  in  any  unit  and  were  in  favor  of  the 
township  and  ward  remonstrance  law.  But  two  years  before  that,  when  the  township 
and  ward  remonstrance  law  was  pending  in  the  general  assembly  and  hanging  in  the 
balance  for  need  of  friends,  they  were  opposed  to  remonstrance  against  the  traffic  in 
any  form,  and  desired  that  you  be  confined  to'  remonstrance  against  the  individual 
applicant.  If  we  are  to  judge  them  by  their  past  conduct  it  is  not  the  unit  to  which 
they  are  opposed.  Contention  that  it  is,  is  but  a  pretense  and  subterfuge.  It  is  the 
principle  of  option  by  ballot  in  any  form  which  they  fight.  They  have  not  changed. 
Grant  them  what  they  now  ask  and  the  next  step  will  be  the  repeal  of  option  by  ballot, 
entirely,  and  your  complete  disfranchisement.  They  present  only  the  nose  of  the 
camel,  but  the  body  of  the  benst  is  back  of  the  nose,  and  behind  its  body  are  the  brew- 
eries of  six  states — Indiana,  Ohio,  Kentucky.  Missouri,  Illinois  and  Wisconsin. 

They  talk  about  substituting  the  township  and  the  city  as  separate  units  for  the 
njunty  unit  only  because  they  fear  you  would  repudiate  a  proposition  to  disfranchise 
you  entirely.  Their  appeal  for  the  township  and  city  units  on  account  of  their  fairness 
is  specious  and  unfounded.  The  question  of  license  or  no-license  is  not  and  cannot  be 
a  township  or  city  question  to  the  exclusion  of  the  rest  of  the  people  of  the  counts' 
in  which  such  city  or  township  is  situated.  Under  our  system  of  county  government 
it  is  of  necessity  a  county  question,  affecting  all  the  people  of  the  county,  whether  they 
reside  in  the  city  or  in  the  country.  If  it  is  right  on  principle  that  a  majority  of  the 
people  of  a  township  or  a  city  should  rule,  it  is  right  that  a  majority  of  the  people  of 
^  county  should  rule      If  i.«?  impossible  to  distinguish  th''  moral  principle  of  the  two. 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  23 

tor  it  is  the  same  in  both — the  right  of  the  majority  to  administer  government. 

Until  we  revolutionize  our  entire  system  of  county  government,  the  county  will 
continue  to  be  the  logical  and  the  just  unit  for  the  local  regulation  and  control  of  this 
trafl5c. 

A  *'wet"  city  means  a  "wet"  county.  This  is  especially  true  of  a  county  seat  city. 
Lines  of  travel, — gravel  roads,  steam  railways  and  interurban  lines — connect  with 
every  section  of  the  county.  All  county  business  is  transacted  at  the  county  seat 
There  the  courts  sit.  There  taxes  are  paid.  There  county  institutes  and  all  county 
meetings  of  every  character  are  held. 

The  question  of  license  is  made  by  the  license  law  itself  a  county  question,  to  be 
decided  by  a  county  tribunal — the  board  of  county  commissioners,  A  county  officer 
approves  the  bond  required  of  the  applicant. 

The  question  of  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  of  the  state  in  the  county  is  a 
county  question,  devolved  upon  the  county  sheriff. 

The  county  is  the  smallest  unit  electing  a  prosecuting  attorney  or  a  judge  of 
the  circuit  court. 

The  location  of  the  county  seat  and  the  construction  of  the  court  house  and 
jail  is  a  county  question  to  be  decided  by  the  people  of  the  county.  Their  maintenance 
is  a  county  question,  devolved  upon  and  paid  for  by  the  people  of  the  whole  county. 

The  county  infirmary  for  the  poor  and  the  dependent  is  a  county  question.  Its 
nxaintenance  is  devolved  upon  the  taxpayers  of  the  entire  county. 

The  local  support  of  the  insane  is- a  county  question  and  devolved  upon  the  tax- 
payers of  the  whole  county. 

The  cost  of  juries,  courts,  and  court  officials,  with  the  exception  of  the  salaries 
of  the  judge  and  the  prosecuting  attorney,  is  a  county  question,  their  maintenance  be- 
ing devolved  upon  the  taxpayers  of  the  whole  county. 

The  cost  of  criminal  trials  is  a  county  question,  devolved  upon  the  taxpayers  of 
the  whole  county.  The  maintenance  of  prisoners  and  the  payment  of  sheriflfs*  in-and- 
out  fees  at  the  county  jails  is  a  county  question,  devolved  upon  the  taxpayers  of  the 
whole  county. 

In  a  state  like  ours,  where  population  and  wealth  are  largely  rural,  the  taxpayers 
outside  the  cities  pay  much  more  than  one-half  the  taxes  levied  by  the  counties.  Prop- 
erty outside  the  cities  in  the  seventy  "dry"  counties  of  the  state  bears  70  per  cent  of 
all  the  taxes  levied  by  such  counties.  The  people  residing  outside  of  the  cities  of  these 
seventy  counties  own  70  per  cent  of  the  property  assessed  for  taxation  purposes, 
while  the  people  of  the  cities  own  but  30  per  cent  of  the  taxable  property  in  such 
counties  and  pay  but  30  per  cent  of  the  taxes  levied  by  such  counties,  and  in  many 
instances  much  less. 

In  Noble  county  almost  80  per  cent  of  the  taxable  property  is  in  the  country; 
in  Madison  county,  56  per  cent ;  in  Wabash  county,  jz  per  cent ;  in  Daviess  county,  75 
per  cent;  in  Huntington  county,  75  per  cent;  in  Jackson  county,  75  per  cent;  in  Ohio 
county,  75  per  cent;  in  Shelby  county,  75  per  cent;  in  Decatur  county,  80  per  cent;  in 
Gibson  county,  80  per  cent;  in  Morgan  county,  83  per  cent;  in  Dekalb  county,  84  per 
cent;  in  Jeflferson  county,  85  per  cent;  in  Whitley  county,  85  per  cent;  in  Jasper 
county,  90  per  cent ;  in  Marshall  county,  90  per  cent ;  in  Warrick  county,  93  per  cent. 


24 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


Township  and  city  option  would  exclude  the  owners  of  70  to  80  per  cent  of  the 
taxable  property  in  most  of  the  counties  of  the  state  from  all  voice  of  participation  in 
the  question  of  license  or  no-license,  and  devolve  the  determination  exclusively  upon 
ihe  persons  owning  but  20  or  30  per  cent  of  the  property  of  the  county.  This  is  not 
governinent  by  majority,  but  government  by  minority.  It  is  neither  Democratic  nor 
Republican.    Fair  dealing  excludes  taxation  without  representation. 

it  is  said  the  county  unit  is  unfair  to  the  liquor  tratfic  because  it  excludes  it  from 
cities  that  desire  the  traffic,  but  no  question  of  fairness  or  of  unfairness  to  the  liquor 
traffic  is  involved.  You  can't  be  fair  to  an  evil.  An  evil  has  no  moral  rights.  You 
QO  not  treat  with  an  evil.  You  destroy  it.  If  not  able  to  destroy  it  wholly,  and  at 
once,  you  seek  its  destruction  step  by  step,  crowding  it  here  a  little  and  there  a  little, 
until  you  are  finally  able  to  exterminate  it.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  treating  the  small- 
pox fairly?  Or  of  just  treatment*  of  typhoid  fever?  Or  of  "square  dealing"  for 
tuberculosis?  These  are  evils  to  be  destroyed  and  not  treated  with.  Wc  make  war 
upon  them.     We  seek  their  elimination,  and  hope  for  their  annihilation. 

if  a  township  or  city  in  Indiana  should  decide  that  it  wanted  smallpox  and  should 
vote  to  remove  all  restrictions  during  an  epidemic  of  smallpox  in  sucli  township  or  in 
such  city,  the  people  of  the  county,  indeed,  the- state  itself,  would  step  in,  for  it  would 
be  the  concern  of  all.  it  would  effect  the  public  health,  the  public  welfare.  So,  with 
the  liquor  traffic.  The  question  of  fair  treatment  to  it  is  not,  and  cannot  be  involved. 
There  is  not  a  dollar  invested  in  the  business  that  has  not  been  invested  with  tlie  full 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  traffic  exists' at  sufferance;  that  it  has  no  inherent 
rights,  which  the  people  in  their  sovereign  capacity  are  bound  to  respect.  An  evil  to 
the  race,  it  is  not  entitled  to  terms  or  treaty,  its  only  due  is  extermination. 
FiGHTiNG  FOR  A  GREAT  STAKE. 

The  liquor  interests  are  lighting  for  a  great  stake — the  recovery  of  thirty-six 
counties  taken  away  from  them  by  an  enfranchised  people,  the  counties  of : 


Bartholomew 

Hendricks 

Johnson 

Monroe 

Starke 

Daviess 

Howard 

Lagrange 

Mewton 

Steuben 

Decatur 

Huntington 

Madison 

Noble 

Vermillion 

Dekalb 

Jackson 

Marshall 

Ohio 

Wabash 

Elkhart 

Jasper 

Martin 

Orange 

Warrick 

Gibson 

Jefferson 

Miami 

Pulaski 

White 

Grant 

Jennings 

Morgan 

Shelby 

Whitley 

Harrison 

These  counties  contain  the  cities  of: 

Anderson 

Columbia  City 

Goshen 

Kendalville 

Peru 

Alexandria 

Elkhart 

Greensburg 

Ligonier 

Plymouth 

Coumbus 

Elwood 

Huntington 

Marion 

Seymour 

Clinton 

Fairmount 
Washington 

Kokomo 

Madison 
Wabash 

Shelbyvillc 

Under  township  and  city  option  all  would  become  "wet."  This  statement  is 
based  upon  the  fact  that  some  township  or  city  in  each  of  these  counties  voted  "wet" 
in  the  late  local  option  elections.  To  these  should  be  added  the  county  of  Delaware 
and  the  city  of  Muncie,  as  the  "dry"  margin  in  Muncie  at  the  late  local  option  election 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


25 


v.as  so  narrow  as  to  make  its  retention  in  the  "dry"  column  extremely  doubtful  under 
city  option. 

The  stake  for  which  the  liquor  interests  fight,  therefore,  is  these  thirty-seven 
counties,  with  their  twenty-three  cities,  14,500  square  miles  of  territory,  and  a  popu- 
lation of  more  than  920,000  people,  two-fifths  of  the  area  of  the  state  and  of  its  popu- 
lation. In  tnese  thirty-seven  counties  there  were  760  saloons  when  they  voted  "dry," 
bringing  to  the  traffic  an  aggregate  annual  income  of  more  than  $7,000,000.  And  this 
IS  the  immediate  stake  for  which  they  fight. 

To  this  rich  stake  should  be  added  isolated  townships  and.  cities 
here    and    there,    which  in  all    probability   they   could    re-take    under    township    and 

city  option.     Then,  the  repeal  of  the  county  local 
k^    V^vi        I        1       I    opt^o^  ^^w  would  give  them  the  prestige  of  terri- 

Wu     Ni  WrJ^ tory  re-taken,  of  cities  re-captured,  of  trade  re- 

TL^JI/  -1 covered,  of    saloons    re-opened — the    prestige    of 

*"^^    ^         '       ^       "^      *■"  ^    victory  won.     Its  repeal  v/ould  impair  the  morals 

of  the  temperance  forces  throughout  the  state  and 
would  bring  discomfiture  and  defeat.  It  would 
be  of  far-reaching  influence,  aflfecting  the  cause 
of  temperance  and  of  good  government  every- 
where. It  would  be  a  step  backward 
where  we  should  go  forward.  It  would 
bring  a  lessened  and  a  restricted  fran- 
chise to  all,  and  complete  and  absolute  disfran- 
chisement in  many  counties.  It  would  place  the 
power  that  justly  lies  in  the  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  county  in  the  hands  of  a  small  minor- 
ity of  the  people  of  the  county  in  the  hands  of  a 
small  minority.  It  would  establish  taxation  with- 
out representation  as  to  the  owners  of  70  per 
cent  of  the  property  in  the  counties  re-taken.  It 
would  blacken  that  which  is  now  white,  and  trans- 
form the  state  to  its  detriment  and  shame.  Here 
is  the  state  as  it  now  is : 
The  liquor  interests  are  prepared  to  fight  fiercely  for  the  recovery  of  this  terri- 
tory, and  the  re-capture  of  these  cities.  Saloonkeeper  and  brewer  both  are  desperate. 
In  the  language  of  the  Indiana  Hotel  Keepers'  Association,  they  "are  bieng  badly 
crowded"  by  the  present  law.  It  has  somehow  adversely  affected  their  business.  To 
them  the  law  is  a  "rank  imposition." 

They  are  effectively  organized.  They  possess  great  wealth — ^wealth  wrung  from 
the  weak  and  hapless.  They  touch  the  financial  interests  of  ma«y  men.  They  are 
unscrupulous  in  method ;  persistent  in  effort,  and  powerful  in  influence. 

They  are  even  now  selecting  agents  to  handle  and  disburse  a  gigantic  corruption 
fund  with  which  to  debauch  the  electorate  in  the  approaching  election  and  later  to 
corrupt  the  general  assembly.  Men  high  in  political  councils  have  already  been  ap- 
proached with  offers  of  rich  reward  for  service  desired.     They  have  silenced  one  of 


:36 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


Here  is  the  territory  that  would  be 
re-taken : 


And  here  is  the  state  as  it  would 
appear  within  a  year  after  the  law's 
repeal : 


the  great  political  parties  in  its  platform  utterance,  and  have  carried  the  other  to  ar 
open  declaration  for  the  law's  repeal.  The  silence  of  the  one  and  the  open  declaration 
of  the  other  were  brought  about  by  brewery  influence  exerted  upon  the  present  party 
managements.  Neither  the  silence  of  the  one  nor  the  pledge  of  repeal  by  the  other 
represent  aught  else  than  the  selfish  desire  of  ambitious  and  self-seeking  politicians  to 
win  in  this  campaign.  And  the  audacious  malfeasance  of  the  one  is  but  little  worse 
than  the  pusilanimous  nonfeasance  of  the  other.  If  the  declaration  of  the  enemies  of 
the  law  for  its  repeal  is  bad,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  conduct  of  its  supposed  friends 
who  run  away  and  leave  it  to  its  fate  undefended?  Both  conventions  betrayed  a  great 
cause, — the  one  by  silence,  and  the  other  by  open  declaration  of  hostility.  And  neither 
reflects,  in  the  position  taken,  the  views  of  the  people  it  represents.  The  attitude  as- 
sumed was  the  attitude  of  the  leaders  and  not  of  the  rank  and  file.  Thousands  of 
Democrats  and  a  multitude  of  Republicans  believe  in  the  county  local  option  law  and 
are  against  its  repeal. 

Much  is  being  said  these  days  by  certain  leaders  against  the  administration  of 
government  by  special  interests  and  about  the  rule  of  the  people.  The  air  is  veritably 
filled  with  talk  for  the  rights  of  the  people,  and  against  government  by  special  interests. 
The  welkin  rings  with  cries  for  the  initiative,  the  referendum,  the  recall  and  the  direct 
primary — cries  that  illy  comport  with  the  platform  declaration  of  the  one  for  the  dis- 
franchisement of  the  people,  or  with  the  silence  of  the  other.     If  these  men  are  sin- 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  27 

cere  in  their  protestations  of  love  for  the  people,  and  for  the  principle  that  the  people 
should  rule,  why  do  the  one  set  of  them  seek  the  people's  disfranchisement  on  this 
great  question,  and  why  do  the  other  set  of  them  stand  dumb  in  the  presence  of  the 
tlireai  to  disfranchise  you? 

There  is  utter  inconsistency  in  the  attitude  of  a  party  that  opposes  government 
by  special  interests  with  one  hand  while  with  the  other  it  takes  away  from  the  people 
their  power  to  control  and  regulate  the  most  wicked  and  powerful  special  interest  in 
the  Republic. 

And  there  is  like  inconsistency  in  the  attitude  of  a  party  which,  in  one  breath 
cries  out  for  the  rule  of  the  people,  then  passes  over  the  question  of  their  proposed 
disfranchisement  in  silence,  and  in  the  next  breath  nominates  a  man  to  the  supreme 
bench  who  has  already  solemnly  declared  the  enfranchisement  of  the  people  in  this 
behalf  to  be  unconstitutional  and  invalid. 

i  am  a  Republican.  1  want  to  follow  my  party  leadership.  1  want  to  vote  its 
ticket.  There  are  thousands  of  other  local  option  Republicans  who  want  to  follow 
their  party  leadership  and  who  want  to  vote  its  ticket.  There  are  also  thousands  of 
local  option  Democrats  who  want  to  follow  their  party  leadership  and  to  vote  its  ticket. 
But  the  silence  of  the  one  on  this  question  and  the  declaration  of  the  other  of  its  intent 
to  repeal  this  law  brings  to  such  men  much  perplexity  and  embarrassment.  The  atti- 
tude of  our  respective  parties  compels  us  either  to  surrender  a  great  conviction  or  to 
decline  to  vote  our  party  tickets  until  we  have  polled  the  candidates  upon  them  and 
ascertained  their  attitude.  I  am  a  Republican,  but  I  will  not  surrender  my  conviction 
on  this  question.  It  means  too  much  to  this  people.  1  shall,  therefore,  vote  for  every 
man  on  my  party's  ticket  who  favors  the  preservation  of  this  law  and  who  believes  it 
to  be  a  constitutional  and  a  valid  enactment  and  who  will  work  and  exercise  his  in- 
fluence for  its  retention ;  but  I  will  vote  for  no  man  for  any  legislative,  executive,  ad- 
ministrative or  judicial  office  who  favors  the  repeal  or  impairment  of  the  local  option 
law,  or  who  believes  it  to  be  an  unconstitutional  or  invalid  enactment,  nor  will  I  ask 
any  other  man  to  vote  for  any  such  candidate.  If  I  find  an  opponent  on  any  other 
ticket  who  believes  in  the  law  and  will  support  it,  I  will  cross  over  and  vote  for  him 
regardless  of  his  politics,  and  I  will  ask  other  men  to  cross  over  and  vote  for  him. 
And,  my  Democratic  brother,  my  Prohibition  friend,  if  you  are  opposed  to  the  repeal 
and  the  nullification  of  this  law,  you  ought  to  do  likewise  as  to  "wet"  candidates  oh 
do  no  otherwise.  Neither  will  I  vote  for  a  man  who  will  not  declare  himself  on  this 
your  tickets.  In  this  way  we  can  save  it,  and  in  this  way  only.  Like  Luther,  I  can 
question.  If  he  desires  to  represent  me  in  any  office,  legislative,  executive,  adminis- 
trative or  judicial,  and  wants  my  vote,  he  must  say  what  he  proposes  to  do  with  the 
power  I  delegate  to  him.  My  right  to  demand  this  and  his  duty  to  answer  goes  to  the 
very  heart  and  center  of  the  principle  of  representative  government.  It  goes  to  the 
heart  and  center  of  government  by  the  people.  Indeed,  only  in  this  way  can  there  be 
government  by  the  people.  The  man  who  cries  out  in  behalf  of  the  principle  of  repre 
sentative  government  and  the  rule  of  the  people,  but  who  refuses  to  tell  the  people, 
whose  suffrage  he  seeks,  what  he  will  do  with  the  power  they  give  him,  has  no  right 
to  expect  power  at  their  hands. 

I  have  been  asked  by  some  ardent,  new-born  souls  if  I  am  in  favor  of  Cannon 


28  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

and  Cannonism,  and  I  have  answered,  "No,  I  have  no  sympathy  with  Cannon  •r  with 
Cannonism.  1  was  opposed  to  both  when  some  people  who  are  now  making  the  most 
noise  about  them  were  in  full  cry  in  the  opposite  direction.  More  than  two  years  ag©, 
as  a  member  of  the  general  conference  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  church,  convened 
in  Baltimore,  1  had  the  privilege  of  moving  a  resolution  for  the  appointment  of  a  com- 
mittee of  remonstrance  lo  visit  Speaker  Cannon,  and  the  honor  of  being  appointed 
chairman  of  that  committee,  and  later  of  making  a  report  of  censure  in  behalf  of  the 
committee,  and  the  pleasure  of  seeing  it  unanimously  adopted  by  that  great  boiy. 
An  action  that  did  much  to  attract  attention  to  him  and  to  his  methods.  But  Cannon  is 
on  his  last  legs,  and  Cannonism,  in  Indiana  at  least,  is  dead,  and  1  have  no  disposition 

to  continue  to  lire  into  the  corpse. 

> 

"And  if  Cannonism  is  not  already  dead  throughout  the  country,  but  should  evi- 
dence signs  of  returning  vitality  in  Washington  next  year,  either  of  the  distinguished 
men  who  are  seeking  election  to  the  United  States  senate  from  this  state,  can  be 
trusted  to  do  it  to  its  death.     Both  are  its  avowed  and  sworn  foes." 

A  livelier,  more  vital  issue  than  Cannonism  is  involved  in  the  repeal  of  this  law 
and  in  the  proposed  disfranchisement  of  our  people  on  this  question. 

If  it  is  the  purpose  of  one  ol  these  distinguished  gentlemen  to  aid  in  its  repeal 
and  of  the  other  to  stand  by  in  silence  while  it  is  repealed,  we  are  entitled  to  know  it. 
No  apostle  of  representative  government  can  afford  to  conceal  his  attitude  upon  any 
question  of  public  concern  to  the  people  he  represents. 

I  have  been  told  that  the  temperance  question  disturbs  the  party,  that  it  tends 
to  disintegrate  and  destroy  the  party.  I  answer,  "So  did  the  slavery  question  disturb 
parties.  It  disturbed  them  because  they  would  not  do  right.  It  disturbed  them  for 
tifty  years.  It  disturbed  them  until  one  great  party  was  actually  disintegrated  and  a 
new  party  born,  with  courage  to  strike  slavery  to  its  death.  There  was  no  peace  while 
slavery  existed.    There  could  not  be  peace  with  slavery." 

History  sometimes  repeats  itself.  Today  we  are  face  to  face  with  another  great 
moral  qustion.  And  speaking  in  the  light  of  the  past  history  of  the  race,  I  say  to 
the  managers  of  both  parties  ni  this  state,  "You  cannot  found  a  party  upon  the  saloon 
and  brewery  and  have  it  stand.  A  party  so  founded  cannot  abide  the  white  light  of 
this  new  century.  Nor  will  it  avail  you  to  cry  for  peace  upon  this  question  any  more 
than  it  availed  your  fathers  to  cry  for  peace  upon  the  slavery  question.  The  great 
battle  of  God  Almighty  is  not  fought  out  and  you  will  have  more  of  it.  There  will  be 
no  pe.re  until  you  do  right.  If  you  want  peace,  do  right  and  you  shall  have  peace. 
But  uni.'l  you  come  up  to  the  grounds  of  moral  truth  and  moral  principle,  and  stand 
on  them,  tliere  will  be  dissention  and  revolution  in  both  parties.  You  may  invent  party 
cries  to  leail  men  astray,  but  they  will  return  to  this  question  until  it  is  settled  and 
settled   right. 

"You  may  despite  this  cau.-,c.  \  ou  may  cruicfy  it  and  cast  it  out  utterly  from  con- 
ventions, but  you  cannot  destroy  it.  it  will  come  up  again.  You  may  kill  its  defenders, 
you  may  silence  its  advocates,  you  may  congratulate  yourselves  that  you  are  well  rid 
of  them,  but  in  God's  own  time  other  defenders  and  new  advocates  will  arise  to  con- 
front you.     It  will  live  lon:^  after  you  have  perished.     Polic'<'R  may  change,  laws  may 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  29 

be  repealed,  parties  may  be  dissolved,  but  this  cause  will  remain  to  agitate  parties  and 
bring  concern  to  their  managers  until  it  triumphs.  You  cannot  kill  it  with  the  sword, 
you  cannot  burn  it  with  fire,  you  cannot  bury  it  with  ballots,  so  that  it  will  not  come 
up  again.  There  is  a  majesty  and  a  sanctity  about  a  great  cause  that  begets  two  new 
defenders  for  every  one  that  falls  in  its  behalf." 

The  liquor  interests  are  planning  more  than  the  control  of  the  general  assembly. 
They  plan  the  reorganization  of  the  supreme  court  itself,  so  that  if  they  should  fail 
again  in  their  effort  at  the  law's  repeal  they  can  be  sure  of  its  nullification  and  of  your 
disfranchisement  at* the  hands  of  that  august  tribunal.  One  of  the  judges  who  joined 
in  the  decree  sustaining  the  law  will  go  off  the  bench  in  January.  He  is  not  a  candi- 
date for  re-elecetion.  His  successor  is  to  be  chosen  at  the  election  in  November.  One 
of  the  judges  who  declared  the  law  unconstitutional  and  void  has  been  renominated 
by  his  party,  and  is  a  candidate  for  re-election. 

If  the  liquor  interests  can  secure  his  re-election  and  the  election  of  one  other 
judge,  the  court  will  be  "wet."  In  that  event  another  case  involving  the  constitution- 
ality of  the  law  will  be  begun  within  thirty  days  after  the  result  of  the  election  is 
known,  and  railroaded  to  the  supreme  court,  and  there  the  law  will  go  to  its  death. 

I  make  no  personal  attack  upon  Judge  Montgomery  for  his  dissenting  opinion. 
I  believe  him  to  be  an  honorable  man.  I  think  he  decided  the  law  as  he  believed  it  to 
be,  and  I  would  not  have  him  decide  against  his  convictions.  For  so  deciding  I  do  not 
blame  him.  Indeed,  I  honor  him  for  it.  But  I  do  blame  him  for  having  such  a  con- 
viction, a  conviction  which  I  believe  to  be  erroneous,  and  which,  if  written  into  the 
law  of  the  land  by  the  court's  decision,  will  strike  down  a  wholesome  and  righteous 
statute  and  work  irreparable  harm  to  society  in  this  commonwealth.  I  would  not  have 
him  write  an  opinion  contrary  to  his  conviction,  but  I  would  take  from  him  power  and 
opportunity  to  write  any  opinion  upon  the  subject  at  all.  He  has  no  more  right  to 
ask  or  expect  men  who  believe  in  the  beneficence  and  the  validity  of  this  law  to  vote 
to  clothe  him  with  power  to  strike  it  down,  than  a  candidate  for  the  legislature  who 
intends  to  vote  for  its  repeal  has  to  ask  or  expect  such  men  to  vote  for  him  that  he 
may  have  power  and  opportunity  to  kill  it  by  repeal.  Believing  that  Judge  Montgomery, 
however  honest  and  sincere  in  his  opinion  is  grievously  in  error  as  to  the  invalidity 
of  this  law,  it  is  my  bounden  duty  to  cry  out  against  his  error  and  to  warn  the  friends 
of  the  law  of  the  effect  of  his  re-election. 

Having  silenced  one  party  and  committed  the  other  to  the  law's  repeal,  its  enemies 
now  seek  to  muzzle  the  Christian  ministry  of  the  state  and  to  silence  the  Christian 
pulpit,  so  that  there  shall  be  heard  no  voice  in  its  behalf. 

They  insist  that  the  sphere  of  the  church  is  filled  when  it  provides  for  the  conduct 
of  worship,  the  preservation  of  doctrine  and  the  salvation  of  the  individual;  that  it 
should  shut  its  eyes  to  the  woes  of  the  race,  to  the  evils  about  in  the  world  in  which  it 
is;  that  it  may  perform  works  of  charity  for  the  amelioration  of  evil  conditions,  but 
it  must  not  concern  itself  with  the  removal  of  the  things  which  cause  the  evil  condi- 
tions; that  it  may  do  charity,  but  must  not  seek  the  reform  of  the  evils  that  create 
the  need  of  charity;  that  church  and  state  are  separate,  and  the  church  must  remam 
dumb  however  Godless  the  state  becomes;  that  the  Christian  ministry  should  devote 
its  time  to  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  and  leave  politics  to  the  politicians. 


30  COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 

1  am  unable  to  consent  to  this  doctrine.  1  hold  the  mission  of  the  church  is 
wider  than  the  individual  and  its  sphere  broader  than  the  simple  amelioration  of  un- 
wholesome conditions.  Its  mission  includes  the  individual,  but  it  includes  society  also. 
Its  sphere  carries  it  to  the  relief  of  unwholesome  conditions,  but  it  carries  it  also  to  the 
study  and  removal  of  the  things  that  cause  unwholesome  conditions. 

1  believe  that  it  should  adapt  its  mission  to  the  conditions  and  needs  of  the  day, 
to  the  regeneration  of  society  as  a  whole.  Things  as  well  as  people  must  be  changed. 
It  should  concern  itself  with  the  cause  of  sin  as  earnestly  as  with  the  results  of  sin. 
If  the  cause  of  sin  can  be  found  and  removed,  there  will  be  no  sin  aaid  no  results  of  sin 
to  be  concerned  about.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  church  to  save  our  common  liumanity. 
Her  heart  beat  should  quicken  with  the  quickening  tide  of  human  life  about  her. 

1  believe  that  she  should  make  every  moral  conflict  her  own;  that  in  her  pulpits 
great  moral  questions  should  receive  downright  and  fearless  discussion;  that  she 
should  throw  her  immense  weight  on  the  moral  side  of  every  question;  that  her  obli- 
gation lies  wherever  a  moral  issue  is  or  can  be  raised;  that  she  is  bound  to  speak 
against  wrongs  wherever  found ;  that  she  must  insist  that  men  go  right  in  life  whether 
in  private  or  in  public  station ;  that  the  religion  of  Christ  is  a  diffused  and  living  force, 
melting  evil  customs,  breaking  down  wicked  institutions,  affecting  all  it  touches. 

I  do  not  believe  in  mixing  either  business  or  politics  with  religion,  but  ]  do  be- 
lieve in  mixing  religion  with  both  business  and  politics.  I  do  not  believe  the  church 
should  enter  politics  to  get  funds  from  public  treasuries  for  her  use,  to  secure  legis- 
lative mandate  for  her  ritual,  or  police  support  for  her  doctrines,  but  I  do  believe  that 
religion  driven  from  the  field  of  state  and  national  interests  into  the  refuge  of  private 
life,  loses  its  hold  upon  the  world  and  ceases  to  be  effective  among  men.  1  believe 
there  are  high  qualities  and  influences  which  can  be  created  only  by  the  Christian 
church  and  that  it  is,  therefore,  her  duty  to  exert  herself  to  reach  the  cosial  and  polit- 
ical life  of  the  nation;  that  her  place  is  on  the  firing  line  where  the  battle  is;  that  it  is 
a  part  of  her  business  to  translate  Christ's  teachings  into  the  activities  of  human  af- 
fairs; that  she  oughtto  be  a  humanizing  influence;  that  is  her  bounden  duty,  when 
she  can,  to  create  moral  issues,  and  to  so  press  them  as  to  compel  political  parties  to 
espouse  them;  that  it  is  her  mission  to  save  both  the  individual  and  the  race. 

I  believe  in  the  divorcement  of  church  and  state,  that  the  machinery  of  the  two 
should  be  kept  absolutely  separate,  but  1  also  believe  that  the  state  needs  a  church  de- 
voted to  the  moral  welfare  of  society ;  that  liberty  cannot  survive  without  religion ;  that 
any  people  must  be  religious  to  be  free;  that  both  church  and  state  should  be  the 
servants  of  humanity. 

I  believe  the  obligation  of  the  church  requires  her  to  assail  every  wrongful  rela- 
tion among  men,  and  to  defend  every  rightful  relation;  that  besides  the  hope  of  per- 
sonal salvation  she  ought  to  plant  the  social  hope. 

1  believe  she  ought  to  refuse  to  be  muzzled  or  to  keep  silent  on  any  great  matter. 
Evils  cannot  be  destroyed  or  eradicated  by  saying  nothing  about  them. 

Some  of  my  political  friends  have  said  to  me,  "Local  option  is  a  forlorn  hope. 
Nothing  you  can  do  will  save  it.  Its  doom  is  sealed.  The  cause  of  temperance  is  a 
failing  cause.  The  evil  of  intemperance  has  always  been  in  the  world,  it  will  always  be 
in  the  world.    You  cannot  change  human  nature.     A  sober  people  is  a  barren  ideality. 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA  31 

A  saloonless  state  an  iridescent  dream.     Why  lead  this  forlorn  hope?     WTiy  throw 
yourself  into  this  breach  at  such  a  cost?    You  are  a  radical,  a  fanatic." 

I  have  answered,  "I  can  do  no  otherwise.  I  have  had  the  dream.  I  have  caught 
ihe  vision.  You  say  we  can't  change  human  nature,  but  we  have  changed  human  na- 
ture, and  we  shall  yet  change  it  more.  Man  has  risen  out  of  the  evil  of  ignorance,  out  of 
the  evil  of  superstition,  out  of  the  evil  of  idolatry,  out  of  the  evil  of  tryanny,  out  of 
the  evil  of  slavery,  and  he  will  yet  rise  out  of  the  evil  of  intemperance.  God  is  not 
yet  bankrupt.  In  the  long  fight  stretching  through  the  centuries  His  arm  will  be  the 
strongest.  We  may  lose  this  battle,  but  we  will  not  lose  the  war,  and  we  are  engaged 
in  a  war.    Right  will  ultimately  prevail. 

"You  say  local  option  is  a  forlorn  hope.  It  may  be.  God  knows.  But  hear  me! 
There  was  a  time  when  the  great  reformation  was  a  forlorn  hope.  There  was  a  time  in 
the  days  of  the  Stuarts  when  English  liberty  was  a  forlorn  hope.  There  was  a  time 
when  religious  freedom  was  a  forlorn  hope  throughout  the  world.  There  was  a  time 
when  representative  government  was  a  forlorn  hope.  There  was  a  time  when  the 
abolition  of  chattle  slavery  was  a  forlorn  hope.  Aye,  there  was  a  time  when  to  mortal 
minds  the  Christian  religion  was  a  forlorn  hope — ^the  manger-born  Christ  an  exile  in 
the  land  of  Egyptians. 

"But  Martin  Luther,  Savonarola,  Oliver  Cromwell,  John  Calvin,  John  Wesley, 
Washington,  Wendel  Phillips  and  Abraham  Lincoln  touched  them  with  the  fire  of  their 
consecrated  genius  and  they  became  living,  resistless,  evolutional  causes,  lifting  the  race 
into  light  and  freedom.  You  should  be  careful  how  you  classify  a  man  lest  you  un- 
wittingly give  him  company  among  the  immortals." 

But,  my  friends,  the  local  option  law  is  not  yet  repealed.  Nor  is  it  yet  invali- 
dated. A  battle  is  not  lost  until  it  is  fought  out.  This  law  is  no  fair-weather  child. 
It  was  born  of  pain  and  travail.  Storm  and  stress  have  marked  its  days.  Its  friends 
have  had  to  fight  for  it  from  the  hour  of  its  conception.  They  fought  its  would-be 
stranglers  at  its  birth.  They  fought  its  would-be  repealers  during  its  cradle  days. 
They  fought  its  would-be  nullifiers  in  the  solemn  precincts  of  the  supreme  court. 
And  they  will  fight  for  it  in  this  free  forum.  And  if  in  the  fight  they  slip  the  ties  of 
party,  its  enemies  cannot  complain,  for  they  will  do  the  same.  There  will  be,  however, 
this  difference.  It»  friends  will  be  fighting  in  a  holy  cause,  its  enemies  in  as  unrighteous 
a  cause  as  ever  summoned  men  to  combat. 

FINAL  APPEAL. 

A  just  franchise,  fairly  won  and  wisely,  widely  used,  is  in  peril — a  franchise  that 
belongs  to  us  not  alone  by  present  law,  but  by  divine  right — a  right  inherent  in  us  as 
men — a  sacred,  priceless  right! 

Men  of  Indiana!  You  who  hate  the  usurpation  of  power  by  corn-.pt  and  wicked 
special  interests; 

You  who  believe  in  the  rights  of  the  individual  man,  in  the  democracy  of  the  people. 

You  who  oppose  the  prostitution  of  womanhood; 

You  who  are  against  the  exploitation  of  childhood; 

You  who  love  your  fellows; 

You  who  have  taken  upon  your  lips  the  name  of  the  Holy  Christ  and  upon  your 
souls  the  obligation  of  social  service; 


32 


COUNTY  OPTION  IN  INDIANA 


You  in  whom  the  love  of  home  and  wife  and  child  is  not  yet  dead,  whose  alta 
fires  are  not  yet  out,  whose  blood  is  not  yet  cold ; 

To  you  I  appeal.  On  this  issue  the  battle  drum  is  beating.  The  muster  roll 
being  called.  Now,  even  now,  is  mar  time.  Here,  the  field.  Today,  the  time;  aye,  thij 
very  hour!  The  issue  is  yours.  Will  you  defend  it,  or  will  you  run  away?  Will  yoi 
stand  and  hold  the  ground  you  have  won,  or  will  you  yield  your  rights?  Will  yoi 
bend  before  the  storm,  or  will  you  keep  the  faith  and  quit  yourselves  like  men?  Yot 
are  not  wont  to  run  away!  In  other  days  you've  been  tried  and  true.  Why  wavei 
now?  Stirred  by 

"The  mighty  hopes  that  make  us  men"  let  us  rise  and  strike  a  freeman's  blow  foi 
a  freeman's  right.  Let  us  not  take  this  offered  lie  for  the  truth  we  have.  Let  us  pu^ 
our  feet  upon  this  traffic  while  we  have  the  power,  that  our  children  and  our  children*is 
children  in  after  years  may  safely  come  this  way.  Let  us  pull  up  together.  Let  us  gi 
this  road  though  we  go  aknee.  Let  us  lift  our  hands  and  loose  our  tongues  and  tell 
the  truth  about  this  foe  of  human  kind.  Let  us  tell  the  truth  about  it,  aye,  tell  th< 
truth!    Tell  it: 

Until  its  wickedness  shall  be  laid  bare ; 

Until  the  poverty  it  creates  shall  cease  to  be ; 

Until  the  pauperism  it  produces  shall  disappear ; 

Until  its  wrongs  to  womanhood  and  its  injustice  to  childhood  shall  be  exposed; 
Tell  it: 

Until  almshouses  and  hospitals  shall  be  no  longer  needed  to  house  the  defective 
it  creates; 

Until  jails  and  prisons  shall  be  emptied  of  their  victims; 

Until  the  insanity  it  begets  shall  cloud  the  intellects  of  men  no  more ; 

Until  the  crime  it  impels  shall  no  longer  be  laid  upon  the  souls  of  men; 

Until  murder  shall  stop  its  riot  and  arson  its  carnival;  Tell  it: 

Until  childhood  shall  be  robbed  no  longer  of  its  birthright-^he  right  to  a  fei 
happy,  cloudless  years,  to  a  well-regulated  home,  to  wholesome  food,  to 
moral  environment,  to  educational   advantages,  to  parental   care,  affectiot 
and  direction,  to  a  "fair  chance"  to  develop  physical  strength,  mental  powc^ 
and  moral  stamina,  to  a  "square  deal"  from  every  man  and  woman  beneatl 
the  flag;  Tell  it: 

Until  men  shall  see  it  with  the  blood  upon  its  naked,  knotted  hands ; 

Until  fathers  shall  cease  to  neglect  their  offspring; 

Until    mothers    need    fear    no    more    for    the    children    they    bear;    Tell    it] 

Until  the  corrupter  of  boys,  this  ravisher  of  girls,  this  despoiler  of  homes,  shall 

stand  condemned,  with  sentence  of  death  pronounced  against  it,  arrayed  iot 

execution;  Tell  it: 

Until  the  Nation  shall  hear,  and  hearing,  be  convinced ; 

Until  the  public  conscience  shall  cry  out ; 

Until  dumb  tongues  speak  and  dead  feet  start;  Tell  it: 

Until  men  shall  feel  anew  the  Cromwell  fire,  the  Lincoln  consecration ; 

Until  the  race  shall  stand  forever  freed  of  its  curse ; 

Until  this  Republic  shall  become  a  saloonless  land,  this  flag  a  stainless  embleml 


TnaXana. 


option  in 


I6H2 


IVl 


rur^-^ — <^ ^^ 


RETURN 


CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

202  Main  Library 


LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2                               3 

4 

5                               6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECAUED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

1  -month  loons  moy  be  renewed  by  colling  642-3405 

6-month  loons  may  be  rechorged  by  bringing  books  to  Circulation  Desk 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  mode  4  days  prior  to  due  dote 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

MftR  \^  1Q8?  ^ 

RBSEIVE 

3  BY 

MAR  ]  5  1 

m 

iORCUUTiON 

DEPT. 

■■ 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6,  60m,  12/80        BERKELEY  CA  94720 

®s 


